Archive for April, 2012

Healthy Debate vs Paranoid Denialism

April 26, 2012

On the ABC tonight, Joanne Nova and her husband David Evans appeared on a program, I Can Change Your Mind About Climate, to put forward their argument, that supposedly the planet has not warmed, despite multiple lines of evidence that show it is.

We glimpsed a little of what drives Nova’s political blog, paranoia of all things government-like. Afraid that the ABC would edit and twist her words, Joanne hired her own cameraman to record the interview. Hmmm. Oh well, let’s skip that for now and discuss their “arguments”.

Luckily it won’t take long because we’ve been over them previously.

(more…)

Last 30 years shows … Nova can’t learn

April 11, 2012

Once more it seems necessary to remind Nova of what Climate Sensitivity why it’s invalid to compare equilibrium expectations against non-equilibrium measurements that are influence by more than just CO2 levels.

Nova compares the last 30 years of warming against her concept of what we should have expected. The problem is she forgets the definition of Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity, the influence of a cooling sun, and the impact of aerosols.

(more…)

Roy Spencer – Nova repeats old mistakes (again)

April 11, 2012

In what can only be described as a determined effort to be wrong, Nova again sings the praise of another debunked paper from Roy Spencer.

Only days ago we saw similar science from Lindzen & Choi, but it seems little was learnt by Nova.

If they had read about the Dessler paper they would have realised it address both Spencers and Lindzen & Choi’s. (more…)

Lindzen and Choi – Nova repeats old mistakes

April 8, 2012

Nova posts another piece of science that has already been debunked. In her article “Satellites show a warmer earth is releasing extra energy to space” Nova relies on the work of Lindzen and Choi (2009), without bothering to mention that their work has been repeatedly debunked.

Does Nova do this intentionally (anyone familiar with the climate debate knows of Dessler’s rebuttal) – or is she simply ignorant?

For more detail on what Lindzen & Choi do wrong, see Dessler 2011 or Trenberth et al. 2011

Climate Sensitivity – Idso? Idsnot!

April 2, 2012

Climate sensitivity is defined as

a measure of how responsive the temperature of the climate system is to a change in the radiative forcing.

Nova’s recent claim on this topic is the use of Sherwood Idso’s research from the 1980’s. Idso’s research was scientifically debunked because his calculation did not actually equate to that of climate sensitivity (see below). No climate scientist used Idso’s methods to determine climate sensitivity because, as we’ll examine, his mistakes were obvious, measuring the change in surface radiation rather than top of atmosphere, measuring the changes in one small location, then extrapolating that to the whole planet, measuring apparent changes in Mars and expecting the Earth to respond in a similar way, not allowing time for equilibrium to be reached.

The most obvious reason why Idso’s estimate of 0.4°C rise in temps for a doubling of CO2 is too low; the planet has warmed that much since he first published in 1984, whilst CO2 levels rose 15% from 350 to 390 ppm.

(more…)