Archives for October, 2013

[Update 2013/11/01: Solar Activity and the so-called “Little Ice Age” is sufficient evidence of Lockwood's opinion]. Sigh. Paul Hudson (remember him?) says Real risk of a Maunder minimum ‘Little Ice Age’ says leading scientist, and the person he purports to rely in is Mike Lockwood, who is sane. However, if you look closely there is…

Isaac Held has a wonderful post about recent work on “Aqua-planet hurricanes and the ITCZ”. Go read it and watch the videos – its utterly refreshing and might change your view of hurricanes. Hey, you kow what? I’ve used that title before. More than once.

Paul links to What Can We Learn About Human Psychology from Christian Apologetics? The article itself is an exercise in proving itself right: the only people reading it will be those who disagree with Christian Apologetics. But I digress; the point I was trying to make was the connection with “the GW debate” and perhaps…

Amsterdam man, 2013

Just like 2011 or 2012 but faster! TL;DR: 3:43:06. Just 5 minutes faster and I’ll only be an hour slower than Maz. This post is mostly for my records. Transport and accommodation just like before, except I had Miranda with me. As you can see, Amsterdam has some exciting architecture. My GPS track is here,…

Begin by reading Role for Eurasian Arctic shelf sea ice in a secularly varying hemispheric climate signal during the 20th century? That post offers some snarks on the paper, and some indications why you might distrust it, but no really substantive criticism. I’ll try to do that here but I won’t fully succeed because (just…

This is Wyatt / Curry’s Stadium Wave (Marcia Glaze Wyatt, Judith A. Curry, Clim. Dyn., Sept. 2013; henceforth W+C), but you don’t get a title like that past a staid journal like Climate Dynamics. Note: the copy of W+C I started writing this from which I found at Curry’s site offers graphics of truely outstanding…

Comments elsewhere, part III

Like its illustrious forebears comments elsewhere and part II. However, rather differently like, in that I want to point to some positives before falling back into snarking. I’ve commented at wottsupwiththatblog and hotwhopper about Li et al.. It is, I think, a flawed paper but not as badly flawed as the denialists reporting of it…

Lindzen jumps the shark

You may say “but you declared Lindzen emeritus in 2011“, and so I did. But that was over the issue of peer review. This is concerning science: arctic sea ice is suddenly showing surprising growth. That’s just stupid. Really; its nothing but propaganda: designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give…

As I was saying, somewhere, to someone the other day, – oh, I reemember, it was to Timmy – you can get rid of some of the problems with future projections by drawing temperature against CO2 emissions, instead of against time. If you do that, you (the person drawing the figure) doesn’t have to prejudge…

Oh, the fun you can have

Who’s Afraid of Peer Review? by John Bohannon is about his experiments in sending a fatally-flawed paper to a variety of open-access journals, and the appalling lack of rejections that followed (note that PLOS-ONE correctly rejected it). To make it not too easy to reject just based on “I can’t find your institute on the…