Rautalannoitetut levät syövät hiilidioksidin

(The undated microscope picture shows a plankton group three weeks after its fertilisation with iron on the research vessel Polarstern. Photograph: Philipp Assmy/EPA)


Idea "aneemisten" merien lannoittamisesta raudalla levien kasvun edistämiseksi ja sitä tietä hiilidioksidin sitomiseksi,jota merentutkija Martin saarnasi luennoillaan jo useita vuosia sitten (koekin tehtiin eteläisellä jäämerellä),tuntuu nyt saaneen hyväksynnän oheisen "Guardian" in artikkelin mukaan.


Linkki Guardian´in uutiseen


Ocean iron plan approved as researchers show algae absorb CO2

Greenhouse gases trapped deep in ocean by iron-fertilised algae, scientists say, as experiment gets green light

Alok Jha, green technology correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 28 January 2009 18.47 GMT

Ilmastonmuutoksen aiheuttajana meri - ei ihminen

(Esitelmä New Yorkin ilmastokokouksesta - Lähde: antigreen-blogi)

Tässä LINKKI esitelmään


Climate Change: Driven by the Ocean not Human Activity

by
William M. Gray
Professor Emeritus, Dept of Atmospheric Science,
Colorado State University

Abstract

"This paper discusses how the variation in the global ocean's Meridional Overturning Circulation (MOC) resulting from changes in the Atlantic Thermohaline Circulation (THC) and deep water Surrounding Antarctica Subsidence (SAS) can be the primary cause of climate change. (MOC = THC + SAS) is the likely cause of most of the global warming that has been observed since the start of the industrial revolution (~1850) and for the more recent global warming that has occurred since the mid-1970s. Changes of the MOC since 1995 are hypothesized to have lead to the cessation of global warming since 1998 and to the beginning of a weak global cooling that has occurred since 2001. This weak cooling is projected to go on for the next couple of decades".

(kokonaisuudessaan linkissä)

Occam´s Razor käyttöön IPCC:n selityksissä ?

"Ilmiöiden selittämistä koskevissa seikoissa kriittisen tarkastelijan paras historiallinen ystävä voisi olla Wilhelm Occamilainen (n. 1285–1349), englantilainen filosofi, jonka partaveitsen nimellä tunnettu periaate kieltää selitysten rakentajaa tuomasta teorioihinsa enempää selittäviä periaatteita kuin on ehdottomasti tarpeellista".

(Skepsis)

"Warmoholistien" tarkimmin varjeltu salaisuus

On tämä, sekä satelliitti- ,että pintalämpötilanmittauksiin perustuva käyrästö (esitetään nyt se kerran taas uusintana),joka kiistatta osoittaa,että vaikka hiilidioksidipitoisuus on noussut viimeisen kymmenen vuoden aikana, lämpötila ei ole,päinvastoin,se on hieman laskenut. Nyt ei IPCC:n "kainalosauva" rikkiaerosoleista enää pelasta teoriaa,kuten 1940-70 laskussa,on keksittävä uusi,koska Mr.Murphya mukaellen,"jos tosiasiat eivät tue teoriaa, sen pahempi tosiasioille" (ehdotan lausetta IPCC:n logoon ;).

(Lähde: antigreen-blogi)



The graph, which is based on the measurements of the official scientific institutions, is the best-kept secret of the `warmoholics'. It indicates that the imminent climate catastrophe exists only in virtual reality - it is a product of computer modelling. Those who are old enough to remember the apocalyptic predictions of the Club of Rome at the beginning of the 1970s will undoubtedly be struck by the similarities. It is high time the EU opened its eyes to facts and discontinued its climate policy, which will only wreck its economy, and will have no effect whatsoever on worldwide temperatures.

USA:ssa "ilmastoagnostikkoja" jo 41%

Ilmastonmuutosta, erityisesti ihmisperäistä eli antropogeenistä ilmastonmuutosta epäilevien osuus kasvaa, nyt Yhdysvalloissa jo 41% gallupin mukaan.


Gallup TÄÄLLÄ

Jos meillä lehtitietoihin (mm. HS) on uskominen,täällä "uskovia" on yli 90%. Voiko näin paljon eroava tulos vapaan uutisvälityksen (?) maassa olla mahdollista ? Vai onko mielipiteitä/uutisia manipuloitu ?

Vaclav Klaus:Miksi ilmastokeskustelu on monologi ?

Tsekin presidentti Vaclav Klaus kysyy: Miksi ilmastokeskustelu on monologi ?

Voisiko sen selkeämmin sanoa !






Czech President Vaclav Klaus on why the discussion about global warming is a monologue

For Vaclav Klaus, the inconvenient truth is this: Global warming is far from being proved, and the problem is that everybody has jumped on the bandwagon before any real debate has taken place. Mr. Klaus won his second five-year term as president of the Czech Republic in February 2008. He studied at the Prague School of Economics, where he currently holds a professorship in finance. Mr. Klaus talked to Robert Thomson, managing editor of The Wall Street Journal. Here are edited excerpts of their discussion.

30 ensimmäisen päivän kävijätilasto blogissa

VISITS

Total 2,192
Average Per Day 108
Average Visit Length 11:31 (SiteMeter)
Last Hour 8
Today 53
This Week 753

PAGE VIEWS

Total 8,983
Average Per Day 534
Average Per Visit 5.0 (SiteMeter)
Last Hour 13
Today 102
This Week 3,740

NeoCounter (uudet vierailijat) 1 407 kpl 27 eri maasta.

Sivun näyttökerrat, viimeiset 7 päivää (Google-laskuri) 3 378 kertaa.

Merenpinnan nousu kiihtyy ? - Ei asiantuntijan mukaan !

Kööpenhaminan alarmistikokous antoi julkilausuman, jonka mukaan merien pinta voisi nousta jopa metrin vuoteen 2100 mennessä, vähintään kuitenkin yli puoli metriä (HS tänään).

Huippuasiantuntijan,professori Nils-Axel Mornerin,maailman johtavan merien pinnankorkeuden ja rannikkojen eroosion tutkijan Tukholman yliopistosta,mukaan tutkimus ei kuitenkaan tue tätä scenaariota.

Lähde TÄÄLLÄ


Accelerated sea-level rise?

Below is an email on the subject from Professor Dr. Nils-Axel Morner [morner@pog.nu], a leading world authority on sea levels and coastal erosion who headed the Department of Paleogeophysics &Geodynamics at Stockholm University

Misused data! Satellite altimetry 1993-2000 was horizontal - the same data set + 2000-2003 was tilted. On top of the physical corrections (giving horizontallity) they added "personal correction" to fit IPCCs claims. What do we call this? If not falsification? See my scientific papers - best: Global and Planetary Change 62 (2008) 219-220.

Meret jäähtyvät, eivät lämpene ?

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

THE EVIDENCE IS THAT THE OCEAN IS COOLING, NOT WARMING

(Energy & Environment Vol. 20, No. 1&2, 2009 - Craig Loehle)

Cooling of the global ocean since 2003

By Craig Loehle, Ph.D. National Council for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc. (NCASI)

ABSTRACT

Ocean heat content data from 2003 to 2008 (4.5 years) were evaluated for trend. A trend plus periodic (annual cycle) model fit with R2 = 0.85. The linear component of the model showed a trend of -0.35 (~0.2) x 1022 Joules per year. The result is consistent with other data showing a lack of warming over the past few years.

Koko teksti TÄÄLLÄ

ICSC:n postulaatit ilmastonmuutoksesta

ICSC:n prinsiipit:


Tässä linkki ICSC:een



1.

Global climate is always changing in accordance with natural causes and recent changes are not unusual.
2.

Science is rapidly evolving away from the view that humanity's emissions of carbon dioxide and other 'greenhouse gases' are a cause of dangerous climate change.
3.

Climate models used by the IPCC* fail to reproduce known past climates without manipulation and therefore lack the scientific integrity needed for use in climate prediction and related policy decision-making.
4.

The UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers and the assertions of IPCC executives too often seriously mis-represent the conclusions of their own scientific reports.
5.

Claims that ‘consensus’ exists among climate experts regarding the causes of the modest warming of the past century are contradicted by thousands of independent scientists.
6.

Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant - it is a necessary reactant in plant photosynthesis and so is essential for life on Earth.
7.

Research that identifies the Sun as the principal driver of global climate must be taken more seriously.
8.

Global cooling has presented serious problems for human society and the environment throughout history while global warming has generally been highly beneficial.
9.

It is not possible to reliably predict how climate will change in the future, beyond the certainty that multi-decadal warming and cooling trends, and abrupt changes, will all continue, underscoring a need for effective adaptation.
10.

Since science and observation have failed to substantiate the human-caused climate change hypothesis, it is premature to damage national economies with `carbon' taxes, emissions trading or other schemes to control 'greenhouse gas' emissions.

"Uskoa" vahingoittavat tutkimukset sensuroidaan !

Koska lämpeneminen kautta 20. vuosisadan on ollut merkityksetöntä, "warmistit" perustavat mallinsa 21. vuosisadan tulevaan lämpenemiseen vesihöyryn "palautekyt-
kentään", siis että se vahvistaisi CO2:n heikkoa efektiä. Kuitenkin, uusin satelliittidata (kerrottu täällä jo aiemmin) todistaa, että tämä vaikutus kuluneiden
35 vuoden aikana onkin ollut negatiivinen.
Siinä meni "uskovien" vahvin fakta ? Vielä mitä,tämän todistava tutkimus sensuroidaan !

Lue tosiasiat täältä blogista !





Sunday, March 08, 2009

Censored: The fact that available data contradict a vital Warmist assumption

Because the temperature rise across the entire 20th century was trivial (just over one half of one degree), the best bet is that the rise (if any) over the 21st century will be trivial too. Warmists avoid that obvious truth by postulating various "amplifying" factors that will make the 21st century rise much greater than that seen in the 20th century. And chief nominee as an amplifying factor is cloud cover and water vapour generally. Sadly for the Warmists, evidence is accumulating that those very factors have in fact a minimizing rather than an amplifying effect. The entire edifice of Warmism is built on the sand of an unproven theory which looks like being in fact the reverse of the truth

he bottom line is that, if (repeat if) one could believe the NCEP data `as is', water vapour feedback over the last 35 years has been negative. And if the pattern were to continue into the future, one would expect water vapour feedback in the climate system to halve rather than double the temperature rise due to increasing CO2.

"Konsensus" kaukana ilmastonmuutoksessa

530 ilmastotiedemiehen kysely 27 maassa antoi tulokseksi:

- 82% uskoi, että ilmastonmuutos on tapahtumassa, mutta vain

- 56% uskoi sen johtuvan pääosiltaan ihmisen toiminnasta ja vain

- 35% uskoi,että ilmastomallit pystyvät luotettavasti ennustamaan tulevan ilmaston


Ei vaikuta "konsensukselta" ?


Tässä linkki uutiseen

Are the scientists and economists who ask these questions just a fringe group, outside the scientific mainstream? Not at all. A 2003 survey of 530 climate scientists in 27 countries, conducted by Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch at the GKSS Institute of Coastal Research in Germany, found

* 82 percent said global warming is happening, but only

* 56 percent said it’s mostly the result of human causes, and only

* 35 percent said models can accurately predict future climate conditions.


Only 27 percent believed “the current state of scientific knowledge is able to provide reasonable predictions of climate variability on time scales of 100 years.”

That’s a long ways from “consensus.”


* No corporate dollars were used to help finance this conference.

* The Heartland Institute has 2,700 donors, and gets about 16 percent of its income from corporations.

* Heartland gets less than 5 percent of its income from all energy-producing companies combined. We are 95 percent carbon free.