Archives for March, 2007

CO2 and T, again

Its evident that some people are still confused by the T/CO2 relationship, so I’ll have another go in fairly simple terms. Let me start with the “official” position, if you like. There are two cases: the current one, where we’re pumping out CO2; and the ice age one, where CO2 varies naturally. There is no…

Well of course, all the time. But in particular World Climate Report claims to be the webs longest running climate change blog (we’ll leave aside the fact that it doesn’t allow comments – how odd, I wonder why? – and so isn’t really a blog). And indeed their archive goes back to March 2004. But.…

The use of Damon and Laut

Thanks to BG, we have a screen capture of the solar graph from the silly “Swindle” prog; I’ve inlined it. Now this is nice, because it says S+C as source. Which means we can look-up the ever useful Damon and Laut. First off, notice that the data plotted *isn’t* solar variation directly, but an index…

My previous post refers. OK, so I went round to a friends to watch the thing. It was fun. My friends weren’t scientists (one of them was a teacher just finishing preparing his classwork on witches, how appropriate), which meant that one of the Big Points (cosmic rays cause weather) elicited laughter rather than belief,…

*I* don’t know. It depends on what you mean. Or perhaps as RP Jr said, “It is a little like saying, would you prefer a poverty rate of 10% or 8%? Well, lower is better, the question is how do you get there? Not by arguing about ideal poverty rates I’d say”. Which is a…

In the course of Why Channel 4 has got it wrong over climate change Robin McKie says: The Observer’s travel desk already gets hate mail merely for highlighting interesting destinations that might seem to encourage carbon-producing air travel Well no. Without condoning the hate mail (which probably isn’t) the grauniad and observer frequently (almost always)…

Paul Holland is floating around in the briny and writing it up. Lucky him (now the storms are over)

Channel 4 I fear: here is there prog page. I’m not going to see it (lacking a tv). It says (you can practically write this stuff in your sleep): The film brings together the arguments of leading scientists who disagree with the prevailing consensus that a ‘greenhouse effect’ of carbon dioxide released by human activity…