The Sun-Climate Effect

Where?

They state the sources of their data and the software they use to graph it.

Because they are using different datasets.

NASA, NOAA and the IPCC are not "the scientists of the world." They are government organizations.

False. Many respected climate scientists who dissent from the AGW narrative have been blacklisted, making it difficult from them to get papers published, to get jobs, or even to keep their jobs.

No. She is effectively excluded from many publications and academic and research positions, as are other climate realists.

That's not a reason.

Many do.

Wrong again. WUWT often publishes articles with links to relevant peer-reviewed research.

There is nothing unprofessional about it.

Like any website. That's how the Internet works.

It's also not accurate.

Publishing expert commentary on peer-reviewed research is definitely taking part in science.

 

Well, not quite -

However, they absolutely can munge about for their own use without any intent to do the work to add their changes back into the shared code base.

 

Waffle~!

If there are any notable changes that question AGW then we can discuss alternative theories.

 

WUWT often blogs peer reviewed research.

But that's not the point. Anthony adds his personal spin and neither Anthony's spin nor the research he publishes are presented with argument from climatologists. Why the HECK should they care what some blogger decides to blog???

When Dr. Curry, or some other ACTUAL climatologist says something, it gets major review by scientists the world over.

Woodfortrees is very unclear about what they are presenting. For example, sometimes they use datasets that come from upper atmosphere. Other times they add "gl" to the end of the dataset and then present something that looks very different. Other times they use an identifier that EXPLICITLY states that they munged the dataset or datasets.

Who is using these tools besides the author at woodfortrees?

Who is analyzing how the tools written by this guy compare to the tools maintained by universities, NOAA, and other climatology institutes around the world?

Who has verified this individual's tools?

 

This qualifies. Enjoy.
The Sun-Climate Effect: The Winter Gatekeeper Hypothesis (I). The search for a solar signal
Posted on July 31, 2022 by curryja | 253 comments
by Javier Vinós and Andy May

“Probably no subfield of meteorology has had as much effort devoted to it as the effects of solar variability on weather and climate. And none has had as little to show for the research labor.” Helmut E. Landsberg (1982)

Continue reading →

 

The section listed as "total absence of warming" is VERY clearly warming.

Plus, the division created to make this person's argument were hand picked in the attempt to prove a point that climatologists do not agree with.

Why should I accept that fabrication instead of:

 

Irrelevant.

By all means enjoy your blog.

 

Indeed.

 

Lol. Such desperation.

 

I don't know any climatologist who thinks that solar variability plays a significant role in the climate change that we are witnessing. IPCC and others show solar variability as having a small contribution compared to human activity that generates greenhouse gas.

Once again, you just post stuff that you think supports your personal beliefs.

Plus, that comment was 40 years ago, a couple years before he died at 79.

Do you really think science has been static for more than 40 years??

 

Woodfortrees is an individual, a software engineer who is developing a toolset for others to use.

Suggesting that he isn't munging the software is LUDICROUS. That is what he DOES. That is his chosen profession.

He has NO qualifications in climatology.

There is NO sign that his software has been used by, reviewed by, or otherwise verified by anyone with a serious focus on climatology.

From the FIRST PAGE of the site:

Yet YOU think it should be accepted as disproof of the entire world of climatological science!!

And, without even a professional review!!

 

I'm sorry you seem to have lost the sense of curiosity and wonder that has always been the attraction of science for me.
The book “Climate of the Past, Present and Future: A scientific debate, 2nd ed.” by Javier Vinós will be published on September 20th, and it is now available for pre-orders. Kobo has a preview inside the eBook. At the time of this writing, both Barnes & Noble and Amazon offer the eBook at the discounted price of $2.99.

 

An uninformed claim.

 

Not at all.

I'm sure it's very interesting. If indeed the earth starts to cool over the next decade or so then I'm sure alternative theories as to why it's all happening will be an interesting read.

 

Of course they do - that's what they get paid for. They're weather ho's

 

Earth has been cooling since 2016.

The Sun-Climate Effect: The Winter Gatekeeper Hypothesis (VI). Meridional transport as the main climate change driver
Posted on September 4, 2022 by curryja | 110 comments
by Javier Vinós & Andy May

“No philosopher has been able with his own strength to lift this veil stretched by nature over all the first principles of things. Men argue, nature acts.” Voltaire (1764)

Continue reading →

". . . During the 20th century, the stadium wave 65-year oscillation had two warming periods, for a total of about 65 years in the warm mode. Solar activity displayed the c. 70-year long Modern Solar Maximum (1935–2005). This means that both natural forcing and internal variability spent most of the century contributing to the observed warming. The unusual coincidence of such long periods of natural contribution helps explain why the early 20th century warmed in the absence of significant GHG emissions, and why so much warming was observed that century as to raise the alarms. The natural contribution to the observed warming comes at the expense of reducing the anthropogenic contribution. . . .

Changes to the global MT state can easily explain the climate changes that took place from the Early Eocene to the late Pliocene, that CO2 changes cannot. The isolation of Antarctica with the opening of the Tasman and Drake passages was bad for Antarctica but good for the planet, as it limited the loss of energy at the South Pole by creating a strongly zonal circulation around Antarctica. As a result, the planet warmed. Even today less energy is lost at the South Polar region, despite much colder temperatures and a steeper LTG, than at the Arctic (Peixoto & Oort 1992). From the Early-Miocene a series of events took place driving the planet towards its present severe icehouse climate. The Arctic Gateway continued opening and in c. 17.5 Ma the Fram Strait deepened enough to allow deep-water circulation (Jakobsson et al. 2007). The Himalayas reached modern elevation by about 15 Ma, the Indonesian Passage underwent significant restrictions 11 Ma, the Bering Strait appeared about 5.3 Ma, and the Panama Gateway closed around 3 Ma (Lyle et al. 200. The result was a transformation from a planet characterized by zonal circulation (Fig. 6.8a) into one characterized by meridional circulation (Fig. 6.8b), where more energy is lost from the poles. . . .

Opposite of what is generally believed, when less energy is transported poleward the planet gets warmer. The planet warmed after 1850 from a a reduction in MT, followed by the increase in GHGs since the mid-20th century. While global warming is likely to continue over most of the 21st century, the rate is unlikely to increase, and might even decrease, disproving nearly every climate projection. Recent warming appears multicausal, caused by changes in solar activity and MT, besides GHGs. It is thus very unlikely that the decarbonization of the economy will have any significant effect on climate, although it could have a great effect on the transfer of wealth from some agents in the global economy to others, even if its total effect on wealth creation is negative."

 

Completely irrelevant blog garble. Do you even read what you write?

 

You're the one who said cooling would be important.
Those are excerpts from Part Six. Perhaps with further study you might understand the material.

 

There is no evidence that the earth is cooling. I won't be spending time reading blogs/books on the basis of a theoretical/conjectured (non-) event.

As I said, if indeed the earth starts to cool over the next decade or so then I'm sure alternative theories as to why it's all happening will be an interesting read.

 

UAH Global Temperature Update for August, 2022: +0.28 deg. C
September 1st, 2022
The Version 6.0 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for August, 2022 was +0.28 deg. C, down from the July, 2022 value of +0.36 deg. C.

 

Laughable.

 

Assuming that by "the earth" you mean its surface temperature, that depends on what your definition of "is" is. The earth is warming right now because it's still summer in the Northern Hemisphere. But it has cooled since 2016. It has warmed since the LIA, but cooled since the Holocene Optimum 7Kya. It has warmed since the last Ice Age, but cooled since the Pliocene 3Mya -- and all previous geological eras going back hundreds of millions of years.

More accurately, you will decline to apprise yourself of facts that disprove the theory that CO2 governs the earth's surface temperature.

The earth has already started to cool -- though whether it continues to do so will depend mainly on the sun, whose activity we cannot yet predict -- and the theories, some of which Jack has posted, are already interesting reads.

 

Sure it is.

They often are.

Because it's interesting, informative, and challenges accepted dogma.

No it doesn't. Many actual climatologists have signed the World Climate Declaration, and it is being ruthlessly suppressed and censored, including Facebook's ban on even mentioning it. But this is at least a useful indicator: infallibly, the side that tries to prevent the other side from being heard is in the wrong.

Because different data look different when graphed.

Fabrication.

Why would it matter?

Why would it matter?

<sigh> Present the same data using your own tools if you want.

 

Woodfortrees is about a computer programmer trying to develop software for munging data.

Climatologists have no interest in what this programmer comes up with, as he is NOT an expert in climatology and climatologists have numerous tools for analyzing data that have been carefully analyzed.

You're wrong about the datasets being different - he is using well known datasets.

 

I'm a computer/software engineer, not a climatologist. I became interested in the topic a few years ago and did some reading and studying. I struggled those this series of articles, understanding maybe 30%, to be generous. It's well reasoned and logical and her final paragraphs in section VI is priceless and powerful. The sun's contribution to global climate cannot be discount by any honest reader.
We're so inundated by "no, it's all man's production of CO2 and, if we don't act immediately we'll all burn up" mantras.
It should be obvious, but apparently not universally, that the reason the Sun's contributions to the earth's temperature doesn't get much attention is because the Sun is beyond the scope and control of politicians, WEF and their cohort. They CAN control the sources of our energy, our vehicles, how we heat and cool our homes and offices - exactly the tools they need to steal the power to govern our own lives.
Blogs or not one must read both sides and assess their content to claim any knowledge of the state of climatology in general, and the Earth's climate in particular.