Climate Change

 Nigel Calder

An article in the The Sunday Times February 11, 2007 presented most of what I have been saying. Previously I had never heard of the gentleman and he certainly has not read my stuff. Please read both his and mine, order not important but concentrate on where we agree and work outwards from there. Note that he is a well respected science writer and was once the editor of the New Scientist, not now I hasten to add because if you peruse the pages of that journal now you will see that absolutely everything coming from the scientific community that does not follow the “perceived wisdom” is completely excluded. Nigel would not be welcome there now.

There are so many convincing papers by eminent scientists, being published by highly respected organisations, that contradict all of the catastrophic climate change predictions coming at us via the media. It is time to wonder what is actually going on. There is a growing body of evidence that the genuine scientific work is being actively suppressed. The general public will not in general surf the web-sites of Universities and other science based organisations. There are many instances reported where media publication editors have consistently refused to publish any material that contradicted the current “perceived wisdom”. The Scientific community can therefore work towards an understanding of our true situation and yet be unable to influence the mass-media’s determination to persist with a fabricated, alarmist scenario completely at odds with observable data. e.g. sea level has not risen and our climate is no more chaotic now than it has ever been.

You may think I have no right to say the above in the face of such overwhelming clamour from the media but the dire predictions have been running for so long now that had they been true we would now have proof all around us. You may think that the proof is indeed all around us because that is the media message that comes at us daily. Every day there is some example of extreme weather and every time its claimed to be proof of climate change.

The truth is obvious from any weather map sequence presented via the Met-Office. A procession of cyclones and anticyclones track across us continuously, these are vast systems of air moving in circles either clockwise or anticlockwise. They do not follow a fixed track so they can run through to the north or the south. As they pass we will experience winds from all points of the compass. Now depending on the size of the system it could be blowing wind over us that came from the Mediterranean or it could just as easily have come straight from the Arctic. Whether the system moves quickly or slowly or even stops for a while is all a matter of probabilities. The air could be wet from passing over a warm sea or bone dry. Variables elsewhere have large effects too, in recent years we have come to recognise the effects of el Nino and la Nina. We have also long been aware of our vulnerability to a variable sun.

In summary our weather is, always has been and always will be wildly chaotic. To find an underlying drift it is necessary to collect a huge mass of accurate data then integrate it to remove the random elements. This done a movement of a degree over a century can be seen but even that is in dispute because the met office data depends on a very large contribution from urban sources where masonry replaces greenery and fuels are burned. The fuel burning is obvious but the exchange of greenery for masonry is not. Photosynthesis takes in light and uses its energy to catalyse carbohydrates from C02 and water with chlorophyll. Now this means that the incident solar energy does not warm the plant or the ground it covers, its consumed by the chemistry. Bricks concrete and roofing materials all warm up and release the heat overnight giving the whole urban area a higher average temperature than the surrounding open countryside. Cities are now so densely built up and populated that given a fairly light wind there can be as much as 2oC increase above the surrounding countryside (except down wind where there will be a diminishing plume of warmth).

In the following work I have used Met-Office data and used its well accepted rate of rise to show that there is no immediate threat notwithstanding the major criticism that the results are skewed by the above heat island effect. There is also now a growing body of evidence using a variety of measurement techniques such as satellites and balloons that have been running long enough for their results to be accepted by the scientific community as equal in integrity to weather stations. These charts show virtually no rise at all and what is there in the fine detail is well within the well established natural variability established by studying polar ice cores, archaeological and dendrochronological work. None of this work is getting published outside the scientific community, even though the credentials of the sources are beyond challenge. It’s all available on the Internet however. I wont lead you, go look for yourself. Google is really good for this, just pick keywords from the above.

As an example of the media misinformation, every time a rising sea level article runs there is library footage of icebergs breaking off the ends of glaciers (proof that the polar ice caps are melting!) the reality is of course that glaciers are supposed to do this. What they don’t tell you is that the average temperature on Greenland is actually falling at present and so is that of the Antarctic continent. The North polar ice cap however almost melted clean away last summer but as there is no land mass under it its just one monster iceberg whose melting has no affect on sea level at all. (second year general science look it up! the ice cube in a glass filled to the brim with water experiment. The ice cube melts but the glass does not overflow!. Reason, ice shrinks as it melts so that the final melted volume of the ice-cube water is equal to the volume that was below the surface, the bit that previously was pushed above the surface no longer exists because the whole of the ice-cube shrank by exactly that much)

The predictions of rising sea level have now been running for decades and as you might expect its a relatively easy matter to measure it. It gets easier to measure changes in sea level by going where tidal changes are low. Scientists have done just that and the result was, no change! While this information is easily found on the web, to my knowledge it has never been published anywhere the general public would be likely to find it, bar one article see below.

Click on the buttons below, then go onto the internet to check it. Before you spend time on a site however take time to check the credentials, the genuine ones have nothing to hide and the best are universities and research institutions.

This is a good place to start it is the BBC news article referred to above, published before the media closed ranks. I expect the piece to disappear one day but no problem, I have saved a copy of the whole thing. It completely destroys the myth of catastrophic sea level rise.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/467007.stm