Recent Comments
Rachel Squirrel- Peluang Menang Poker Online Yang Efektif December 8, 2022
- Rabett Run
- What do physicists want? February 15, 2023
- HotWhopper
- Variable Variability
- One more reason I dislike linking climate change and extinction August 23, 2022
- RealClimate
- Unforced Variations: Apr 2023 April 1, 2023
- Open Mind
- A High Schooler’s Take on the Climate Crisis August 5, 2022
- Climate denial crock of the week
- robertscribbler
- Moyhu
- CFACT says Net Zero is impossible? Debunked. March 21, 2023
- Real Sceptic
- Choosing Alternative Medicine To Treat Cancer Is Deadly October 25, 2017
- Musings on Quantitative Palaeoecology
- Resampling Assemblage Counts September 13, 2021
- James’s Empty Blog
- No comment necessary November 18, 2022
- More than just data
- EGU 2022: Back in person May 29, 2022
- Mallemaroking
- A comment piece on the SROCC September 26, 2019
- Symptons of the Universe
- PhD opening in Nottingham Nanoscience Group: AI & Atoms February 16, 2023
Monthly Archives: May 2013
Watt about the CFCs?
Watts Up With That (WUWT) has a new post about a new study suggesting that global warming is caused by CFCs not carbon dioxide. It refers to a paper by Q.-B. Lu with the title Cosmic-ray-driven reaction and greenhouse effect … Continue reading
Apparently we’re all climate skeptics now!
Watts Up With That (WUWT) has a new post called it’s official: we’re all climate skeptics now. I assume that they mean skeptic in the sense “we’re all skeptical of the results of climate science”, rather than skeptic in some … Continue reading
Web of “lack of” Knowledge?
There is another post over at Watts Up With That (WUWT) claiming that John Cook’s consensus paper is falling apart. They seem rather fixated by this paper, which is interesting in itself. Anyway, it’s based on a post on Bishop … Continue reading
Lies, damned lies and statistics!
There’s rather a strange post over on Bishop Hill called Met Office admits claims of significant temperature rise untenable. The post discusses the Met Office’s response to a parliamentary question by Lord Donahue in which he asked …Her Majesty’s Government … Continue reading
Is Otto et al. (2013) just simply wrong?
Addendum – 27 May 2013 Just in case you don’t get as far as the comments, the answer, unsurprisingly, to the question I pose in the title is No. I did not properly understand what one of the terms in … Continue reading
The Transient Climate Response and the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity
There seems to have quite a lot of dicussion recently on Watts Up With That (WUWT) about climate sensitivity, in particular the Transient Climate Response (TCR) and the Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS). Some of what has been claimed on WUWT … Continue reading
Nic Lewis on Climate Sensitivity
Nic Lewis has another post on Watts Up With That (WUWT) called Updated climate sensitivity estimates using aerosol-adjusted forcings and various ocean heat uptake estimates. Basically he tries various different changes in radiative forcing and ocean heat uptake rates to … Continue reading
Watt about the anti-information?
There is a new post on Watts Up With That (WUWT) by Cato Boffins Patrick J. Michaels and Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger. The post is called anti-information in climate models. The post considers the two models evaluated by the first … Continue reading
Has global warming stalled?
A particular theme of mine on this blog has been that using temperature anomaly data alone to determine if global warming has stopped or not is simplistic and ignores indicators of global warming. These are reductions in the volume of … Continue reading
Hmm, Willis tries to be clever again!
Willis Eschenbach has a new post on Watts Up With That (WUWT) called Model climate sensitivity calculated directly from model results. HotWhopper has already covered this in a new post, but I thought I would add my two cents worth … Continue reading
...and Then There's Physics 