Comments on: Climategate

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 01 Dec 2020 22:09:45 +0000

Hi, my name is Mike. Recently I found a very interesting site https://online-australia.net/ Here you can contemplate the city of Australia in all its glory, enjoy wonderful landscapes. I really liked it and therefore I decided to share it with you.

By: Larry Berg

Larry Berg — Fri, 16 Oct 2020 19:56:34 +0000

I like your chart showing three different precipitation results. I see that all the time in my research. So much overlapping data out there.

Regards,
Larry Berg

P.S. Your other Comment areas don’t work. They give an error message in the Website area.

By: n.n

n.n — Sat, 15 Aug 2020 19:44:43 +0000

In reply to ivankinsman. Sea level rise is observable. A correlation between sea level rise and climate, perhaps. A cause and effect relationship between sea level rise and climate change is a matter of truth, not fact, and climate change over a 30 year period is not established. Fake, misleading (misinformation), or deceptive (disinformation) news.

By: Peter

Peter — Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:53:40 +0000

In 2006 I visited Glacier Bay in Alaska, and was handed maps with lines on them showing the melting of that 65 mile glacier which originally occupied the entire bay. They indicated that it started to melt prior to the year 1800, and the better part of it was gone by about 1900. All that was prior to the invention of the airplane, the mass-production of the automobile, and with earth’s population 1/4 or less than that of today.

Recently I checked the Glacier Bay website and did not see the lines on any of their charts showing that melting. Is this another case of erasing some inconvenient data? My understanding is that the data on the melting had been obtained from the early charts made by the seafarers documenting the coast for navigation purposes. I still have copies of what I was handed back in 2009.

By: 하노이 골프투어

하노이 골프투어 — Tue, 17 Mar 2020 06:23:10 +0000

I’m glad I can write on your website. Thanks for sharing.
I also tagged mine.

By: Jess Hill

Jess Hill — Fri, 20 Dec 2019 02:07:24 +0000

I just read an article linking the Sun’s “Ultra-Low Frequency Wave Structures” with abrupt climate shifts going all the way back to the Younger-Dryas period.

https://solar-cycle-schematic.com/2018/09/24/younger-dryas-mystery-solved/

By: Eddie Banner

Eddie Banner — Fri, 18 Oct 2019 19:38:11 +0000

A critical review of Earth’s Energy Balance and the Greenhouse Gas Theory

Eddie Banner 18/10/19

As a physicist, I have long had doubts about the Greenhouse Gas Theory for global warming, and I recently came across a paper on this matter which enhanced my difficulties. This paper seems to base the theory on consideration of the global annual mean energy budget of Earth’s climate system, and shows a diagram by Trenberth and Fasullo.(1)

Several other published figures can be found on this topic on the internet, including some by NASA, with similar values.

There are a number of items here that I’m concerned about, but the main one is the claim for the downwelling back radiation of 333 Watts per square metre of Earth’s surface.

1. Where does all this extra energy come from, since the figure shows only (161+78), that is 239 Wm^-2 entering the Earth’s climate system from the Sun, and 239 being emitted to space, as required for energy balance?

2. The downwelling back radiation (333) is shown coming from the Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. However, it is well known and fundamental in GHG theory that photons of energy emitted by GH gases are radiated equally in all directions; therefore there is equal energy radiated upwards and downwards. This upwards energy flux is simply not shown in the Trenberth figure, but it cannot be ignored. It must be 333 Watts per square metre, and together with the unexplained 333 downwelling radiation, this makes 666 Watts per sq.metre to account for, because this is in addition to the 239 shown emitted to space in the diagram, as required. But the TOTAL input from the Sun is only 341.

Moreover, the upwards energy would add to the 239 already shown emitted, making a total of 572 emitted to space, which clearly is nonsense.

So what is the explanation? I should be grateful for any helpful comments.

(1) http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/staff/trenbert/trenberth.papers/BAMSmarTrenberth.pdf

By: Lester Hobdy

Lester Hobdy — Tue, 01 May 2018 09:59:59 +0000

It’s nice to read good comments. It makes it much more enjoyable!

By: Ric Werme

Ric Werme — Tue, 12 Dec 2017 13:51:34 +0000

I have a copy of the “Harry README” file at http://wermenh.com/climate/HARRY_READ_ME.txt

By: Fool on the hill

Fool on the hill — Wed, 01 Nov 2017 15:09:59 +0000

Oh my, THIS is still here? Haven’t any of you numpties heard? There were three investigations into the so-called climategate, and each found that nothing as alleged had happened, that researchers were falsifying nothing, and that the hacker [still being investigated by the police] thing except extreme frustration on the part of professionals trying to do their jobs and having to waste precious time answering FoI requests placed by denier shills to do precisely that. What a load of wasted efforts and time spent on nothing.
Still, everyone should have a hobby, eh?
Future miners of the web, if it and they even exist, will have a ;laugh reading all this fictional nonsense.

By: ivankinsman

ivankinsman — Thu, 05 Oct 2017 17:17:00 +0000

In reply to don.

Your just like the Donald – anything you don’t like immediately branded ‘fake news’ – pathetic my friend. Follow your own path in life and think for yourself …

By: don

don — Thu, 05 Oct 2017 14:58:58 +0000

In reply to ivankinsman. fake news

By: ivankinsman

ivankinsman — Thu, 10 Aug 2017 13:17:04 +0000

Now I am pretty sure there are some Alaskan climate sceptics on this site who are still saying, ‘nope, we are libetarians – anything connected to global heating is restricting our rights and increasing the financial burden on us so we do not support any kind of environmental legislation in any way associated with global warming.
Well, here are members of the Alaskan community who are suffering from the impact and who have basically been shafted by the new administration in Washington – but not that you care it seems:
Alaskan towns at risk from rising seas sound alarm as Trump pulls federal help – Communities in danger of falling into the sea say assistance from Washington has dried up: ‘It feels like a complete abdication of responsibility on climate change’
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/10/alaska-coastal-towns-sea-level-rise-climate-change

By: DB

DB — Thu, 23 Jul 2015 01:58:01 +0000

At Brian April 23, 2015 at 5:30 pm, the witnesses and questions to those witnesses were cherry picked. Nice try with the appeal to authority though. If they questioned scientists and investigators that were or became critical due to the evidence found in the CRU leak, the conclusions would have been damning for the CRU and the University of East Anglia as a whole.

By: Shannan

Shannan — Mon, 20 Jul 2015 00:00:16 +0000

Paragraph writing is also a excitement, if you be familiar with afterward you can write
otherwise it is complicated to write.

By: otter17

otter17 — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 17:41:59 +0000

Shhhh, they don’t want to hear that.

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 24 Apr 2015 00:30:15 +0000

Haven’t the CRU emails been extensively investigated by several independent sources and no one was found to have acted scientifically unsound?

By: официальный сайт

официальный сайт — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 05:49:36 +0000

Learn how to write evaluation literature.
Подробнее читайте здесь – официальный
сайт
What is overview of literature?
Writing the introduction
Writing your body
Writing concluding
What is evaluation literature?
The format of evaluation literature are vastly different from discipline to
discipline and from assignment to assignment.
A review could be a self-contained unit — a conclusion in itself — or even a preface to and rationale for undertaking
primary research. A review can be a required component of grant and research proposals and infrequently
a chapter in theses and dissertations.
Generally, the purpose of the review is usually
to analyze critically a segment of the published body of
info through summary, classification, and comparison of prior studies, reviews of literature, and theoretical articles.
Writing the introduction
In the introduction, you must:
Define or identify the overall topic, issue, or
section of concern, thus providing the right context for reviewing the literature.
Point out overall trends of what has been published about the
subject; or conflicts on paper, methodology, evidence, and conclusions;
or gaps in research and scholarship; or possibly a single problem or
new perspective of immediate interest.
Establish the writer’s reason (perspective) for reviewing the literature; explain the factors to be used in analyzing
and comparing literature plus the organization on the review (sequence); and, at the appropriate time,
state why certain literature is or possibly not included (scope).
top
Writing your body
In your body, it is best to:
Group studies and other varieties of literature (reviews,
theoretical articles, case studies, etc.) in accordance with
common denominators including qualitative versus quantitative
approaches, conclusions of authors, specific purpose or objective, chronology, etc.
Summarize individual studies or articles with as often or very little detail as each merits
based on its comparative importance from the literature,
remembering that space (length) denotes significance.
Provide you with strong “umbrella” sentences at beginnings of paragraphs,
“signposts” throughout, and brief “so what” summary sentences at intermediate points within the review to assistance with understanding comparisons and analyses.
Writing the actual final outcome
In the actual final outcome, you ought to:
Summarize major contributions of significant studies and articles to your body of information under
review, maintaining the target established within the
introduction.
Evaluate the actual “state on the art” for that
body of information reviewed, indicating major methodological flaws or gaps in research, inconsistencies the theory is that and
findings, and areas or issues pertinent to future study.
Conclude by giving some understanding of the relationship involving the central topic with
the literature review as well as a larger part of study
for instance a discipline, a scientific endeavor, or
even a profession.
top
For more information see our handouts on Writing a Critical
Review of any Nonfiction Book or Article or Reading a Book to Review It.
To find out about literature reviews, check out our workshop on Writing Literature Reviews of Published
Research.

By: cin

cin — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 22:36:09 +0000

“However, Anthony Watts, a weathercaster who runs one of the most prominent anti-science blogs, Watts Up With That?, acknowledged Heartland was helping him with $90,000 for a new project.”
Hypocrite!
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/feb/15/leak-exposes-heartland-institute-climate

By: Bob Bridges

Bob Bridges — Tue, 16 Sep 2014 06:11:30 +0000

For a well documented look at how our sun plays a major rule in earth climate, I highly recommend this web site: http://www.suspicious0bservers.org/cliemate/