climate science

Category archives for climate science

Dark deeds of definitions?

In comments on the sea ice post, both Rob Dekker and Chris Randles has queried an apparent change to the definition of “ice free” as applied to the Arctic. As any fule kno, the definition of “ice free” usually used is “less than a million square km” (1MSK) in order to account for the misc…

A Falconer Uppermost

Plan 8 from outer space refers. If you can guess how that relates to this post’s title1, then you will understand Gavin’s tweet (which I didn’t at the time). There’s also a WaPo article and doubtless much elsewhere. This is for stuff so stupid that even WUWT is now rejecting it (though they used to…

Sea ice: dull as expected

Time to declare this year’s sea ice race over – thanks to those of you who pointed this out to me while I was on holiday. As an apology for the lack of interesting things to say about sea ice, there’s a couple of nice pix of mountain ice at the end. Follow them to…

It’s the folks over at No Truth Zone again. Thanks (do I mean that? No, I don’t) ATTP for drawing it to my attention (via the swamp that is Breitbart). The wiki part is tediously wrong; see A child’s garden of wikipedia, part I in the unlikely event of your not being able to work…

A bit more mountain

You may have noticed that blogging here has been a little thin recently. That’s because I’ve been on holiday. It was glorious. There will be a full post or indeed series of posts in due course; for the moment you get just this. If you can work out where that is without cheating you’re doing…

The answer turns out to be “Arrhenius, of course” and the details turn out to be not desperately interesting. But if you want to know more see Which early works are cited most frequently in climate change research literature? A bibliometric approach based on Reference Publication Year Spectroscopy (no, I didn’t bother find out exactly…

There’s a vair nice post at Moyhu called climate feedbacks and circuits. I think it is particaulrly nice that someone competent has finally taken and shaken the gibberish about feedbacks that the EE’s fling about so thoughtlessly and actually made some sense of it.

Launch spending

An image from the Economist’s Technology Quarterly. Interesting to me: I’ve been following the Space X (not to be confused with Force X) stuff with great interest. But I hadn’t realised that launch was such a tiny fraction of the overall spend. As a minor tie into the nominal subject of this blog, notice that…

There is, of course, a theory of law. As soon as you ponder the question, you realise there must be. But it had never occurred to me (in my faint defence I find, now I look, that whilst wiki has a category for theories of law, it doesn’t seem to have an overall article on…

Feyerabend?

Andy Skuce, in On and against method and process is (to me) bizarrely keen on Paul Feyerabend (though presumably he discards the numerous cites to Lenin, denigration of modern medicine, and all the really wacko stuff). I kinda tend to mix F up with the other out-of-their-depth French folk like Latour that Sokal and Bricmont…