Tuesday, May 8, 2012

4009.txt

date: Tue Aug 19 10:40:55 2008
from: Phil Jones <p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk>
subject: Re: Fwd: RE: AGW arguments
to: Michael Schlesinger <schlesinatXYZxyzos.uiuc.edu>

Mike,
Go here - [1]http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/
and scroll down to where you can download the HadCRUT3
data for the Globe. You can also get NH and SH separately
and the HadCRUT3v version is also there.
In the global column the value for 2008 is based on the first
7 months of the year.
There are several ways to answer the question
1. Extract the SOI signal from the global T record.
2. The easiest though is just to put a regression line through
the values from 1998 to 2007. This gives a +ve trend, but not
sig as you'd expect. Adding 2008 may make the trend -ve,
but it still wouldn't be significant.
La Nina is the reason, as you know for the cooling. As soon as
we get an El Nino, then ...
It is not me doing the WW2 adjustments. It does seem to be taking MOHC
some time to do this. I reckon they are trying to add in more of the newly
digitized British SST data for the period.
Cheers
Phil
At 19:43 18/08/2008, you wrote:

Phil:
In order for me to answer the second question below, shown in red, please send me your
latest compilation of the global, annual mean temperature departures.
In a related matter, when do you anticipate completing the correction for the post-1945
temperature error that result from the British navy's resumption of bucket SST
measurements then?
Michael

X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1219083574-7214032f0000-AEr4jg
X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1219083574-7214032f0000-AEr4jg
X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1219083574-7214032f0000-AEr4jg
X-Barracuda-URL: [2]http://140.233.2.12:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi
From: "Isham, Jon" <jishamatXYZxyzdlebury.edu>
To: "'peden@middlebury.net'" <pedenatXYZxyzdlebury.net>
CC: "'Ethan Allen Institute'" <ethanallenatXYZxyzgcon.com>,
"'Michael Schlesinger'"
<schlesinatXYZxyzos.uiuc.edu>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:19:27 -0400
X-ASG-Orig-Subj: RE: AGW arguments
Subject: RE: AGW arguments
Thread-Topic: AGW arguments
Thread-Index: AckBS49hobYZmEoYR3mjgGaQdtX2eAAEn5Kw
Accept-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
X-Barracuda-Connect: junglecat.middlebury.edu[140.233.2.175]
X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1219083574
X-Barracuda-Encrypted: RC4-MD5
X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by Barracuda Spam Firewall at middlebury.edu
X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 1.70
X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=1.70 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0
QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=1000.0 tests=BSF_SC0_SA074, BSF_SC0_SA074b,
EXTRA_MPART_TYPE, HTML_MESSAGE
X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.1.3030
Rule breakdown below
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
1.00 EXTRA_MPART_TYPE Header has extraneous Content-type:...type= entry
0.50 BSF_SC0_SA074 URI: Custom Rule SA074
0.20 BSF_SC0_SA074b URI: Custom Rule SA074b
0.00 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
Jim:

I am passing your email along to my friend Michael Schlesinger at U. Illinois-Urbana,
who is one of the world's most well-regarded climate scientists and an authors of dozens
of referred articles on climate change.

Michael, when you have a minute, would you mind addressing Jim's two central claims:
that (a) 'There is to date, nothing in today's climate nor in the recent past which
falls outside of the variability of normal climate change and that (b) 'since 1998,
average global temperatures have been falling in spite of rising CO2 levels, again
laying waste the notion that CO2 causes global warming. Thanks in advance Michael.

Best regards,

Jon

Jonathan Isham
Luce Professor of International Environmental Economics
Middlebury College, Middlebury, VT 05753

802 443-3238

* [3]EC265 home page
* [4]ES380 home page
* [5]Home page and [6]Ignition: What You Can Do to Fight Global Warming and Spark a
Movement
___________________________________________________________________________________

From: Peden HQ [[7]mailto:peden@middlebury.net]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 11:59 AM
To: Isham, Jon
Cc: 'Ethan Allen Institute'
Subject: Re: AGW arguments

I prefer actual empirical science to artificially constructed climate "models". For
example, the latest AQUA satellite data, as interpreted by Dr. Roy Spencer, showing the
non-existence of the CO2 warming "fingerprint", laying waste to all of the climate
models which predict otherwise. Roy's most simple conclusion, after examining the
actual real-time data was, " This means the models are all wrong...".
There is to date, nothing in today's climate nor in the recent past which falls outside
of the variability of normal climate change. In fact, since 1998, average global
temperatures have been falling in spite of rising CO2 levels, again laying waste the the
notion that CO2 causes global warming. In fact, changing CO2 levels are a result, not a
cause of global temperature excursions, as anyone who understands CO2 solubility in
water already knows. Warmer (ocean) waters release CO2 and cooler waters absorb it, and
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature in all known proxy data sets. Al Gore managed to get
it exactly backward in his documentary, and the scientifically illiterate climate
alarmist sheep have dutifully followed in lockstep with that notion.
[]
What does amaze me is the number of non-scientist climate pundits who chose to ignore
the actual science in favor of terminally-flawed computer models which to date have
failed to predict anything remotely accurate in terms of climate "change". They seem to
actually believe that a consensus of wrong answers will magically change the laws of
physics and result in the desired outcome as predicted by the failed climate models.
"If we wish hard enough for the sky to fall, then it must...".
For the mathematically and scientifically literate, I highly recommend [8]this very
straightforward look at the actual physics behind the "greenhouse effect" -- for all
others, I suggest a new line of work as the field of scientifically illiterate climate
pundits is already overcrowded.
Jim Peden
Retired Atmospheric Physicist
==================
Isham, Jon wrote:
It is the full set of these. I recommend to both of you Spencer Weart's The Discovery
of Global Warming. [9]http://www.aip.org/history/climate/ It documents well, in a
Kuhnian sense, how we got to where we are.

And it's interesting to see Marty Weitzman's new work:
[10]http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/weitzman/files/modeling.pdf Here's
Krugman's recent summary:

Martin Weitzman, a Harvard economist who has been driving much of the recent high-level
debate, offers some sobering numbers. Surveying a wide range of climate models, he
argues that, over all, they suggest about a 5 percent chance that world temperatures
will eventually rise by more than 10 degrees Celsius (that is, world temperatures will
rise by 18 degrees Fahrenheit). As Mr. Weitzman points out, that's enough to
"effectively destroy planet Earth as we know it."

Jon.


Jonathan Isham
Luce Professor of International Environmental Economics
Middlebury College, Middlebury, VT 05753

802 443-3238

� [11]EC265 home page
� [12]ES380 home page
� [13]Home page and [14]Ignition: What You Can Do to Fight Global Warming and
Spark a Movement
___________________________________________________________________________________

From: Ethan Allen Institute [[15]mailto:ethanallen@kingcon.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 9:10 AM
To: Isham, Jon
Subject: AGW arguments

Just for clarity, which of the following rationales for AGW do you find compelling:

Here are some possible choices :

1. All (or most) scientists agree
2. The 20th century is the warmest in 1000 years [the "hockeystick" argument]
3. Glaciers are melting, sea ice is shrinking, polar bears are in danger, etc
4. The weather has been unusual: Hurricane Katrina etc
5. Greenhouse models all agree that the climate should warm
6. Sea levels are rising
7. Correlation -- both CO2 and temperature are always increasing
8. Models using both natural and human forcing accurately reproduce the detailed
behavior of 20th century
global temperature.
9. Natural forcings are known well enough so remaining warming must be human-caused
10. Modeled and observed PATTERNS of temperature trends ("fingerprints") of the past 30
years agree
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - [16]http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.5/1618 - Release Date: 8/18/2008 6:51 AM

Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="image001.jpg"
Content-Description: image001.jpg
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="image001.jpg"; size=21510;
creation-date="Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:19:25 GMT";
modification-date="Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:19:25 GMT"
Content-ID: <image001.jpg@01C9013D.6B26AF60>

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

No comments:

Post a Comment