Scottish Sceptic

In previous articles I explained how the 1970-2000 warming was very likely caused by pollution reduction measures:

• Understanding Global Temperature VIII – It was the greens wot warmed us!!
• Understanding Global Temperature ix the role ofCO2

Today prompted by some comments on WUWT about the steady reducing value of “climate sensitivity” I wanted to point out how changing pollution levels explain this and the 1970s cooling.
First to recap the main evidence. This map shows that the warming spots have been about 3-8days downwind of areas that were polluting heavily in the 1970s (Particularly Europe and US)
The 3-8days fits well with the time it takes for pollution to be washed out of the atmosphere by rain. Strongly implicating cloud formation in the process. In other words, pollution acted as a nuclei around which cloud droplets formed which then blocked sunlight.

1970s Cooling

Continue reading →

The Guardian had a headline:

Trump begins tearing up Obama’s years of progress on tackling climate change

I was intrigued to know just how bad the snowflakes are taking Trumps dismantling of Obama’s absurd and unconstitutional changes.
As normal, rather than read the biased crap they print, I went straight to look for the comments. But there are none. This says all you need to know about how out on a limb the Guardian now is on the science. Because they dare not let people comment because they know the comments will be dominated by sceptics and that despite banning everyone they can … there are more and more and they win the argument.
But what I did see is these:

Clearly the £100million losses they have been losing are starting to bite. From a purely financial point of view, you’ve got to question whether using the Guardian as a free propaganda sheet for Greenspin makes financial sense. Surely it would be better just to give the greenblob the £1 billion they got from Autotrader? (note the irony of living off the spoils of fossil fuel).

Afterthought

Usually when a group of “morally superior” activists get their hands on a blob of money this large, they not only attract extremists – who then attract even more extreme extremists, but they also end up lining their own pockets. I bet the Guardian has some of the highest pay rates and the most lucrative pensions of any journalists.

And final thoughts

I’ve just closed them down after only reading the headline … which is about all I care to read.

Yesterday I proved that global temperature is controlled by the equation:

T₀  = L.h_trop/{1- (P_trop/p₀)^(R₀.L/g.M)}

Where
p = pressure at height h (pa) .. or …
P_trop = pressure at troposphere (assumed to be 0.1bar)
p₀ = pressure at surface (pa)
L = Lapse rate (=g/C_p) (J/(kg.K)
h = height (m)
T₀ = Temperature at surface (k)
g = gravity (m/S²)
M = Molar mass of dry air (0.0289644 kg/mol)
R₀. = Universal gas constant (8.31447 J/(mol.k)

This apparently shows that the temperature at the surface is purely a function of pressure and gas constants and is not related to solar radiation. This goes a long way to explain the apparent relationship found by Ned Nikolov & Karl Zeller.
Now, however, I will try to demolish that “proof”. Let’s start by finding those that are determined by fixed attributes of the planet, its gases, gravity etc. Continue reading →

We are constantly being told that the Greenhouse effect is due to a radiative process. I want to show simply that it is not. Instead as per Ned Nikolov & Karl Zeller I want to show that from first principles it can be shown to be pressure related.
To do this I simply take the pressure curve for an atmosphere:

p = p₀ (1 – L.h/T₀) ^ (g.M/R₀.L)

Where
p = pressure at height h (pa)
p₀ = pressure at surface (pa)
L = Lapse rate (=g/C_p) (J/(kg.K)
h = height (m)
T₀ = Temperature at surface (k)
g = gravity (m/S²)
M = Molar mass of dry air (0.0289644 kg/mol)
R₀. = Universal gas constant (8.31447 J/(mol.k)

Then all we do is to turn this around and express it in terms of the pressure and height of the tropopause (0.1bar or 10,000pa as per Robinson & Catling: “Common 0.1 bar tropopause in thick atmospheres set by pressure-dependent infrared transparency”)

T₀  = L.h_trop/{1- (P_trop/p₀)^(R₀.L/g.M)} Continue reading →

After trying & failing to reproduce the results in the paper “New Insights on the Physical Nature of the Atmospheric Greenhouse Effect Deduced from an Empirical Planetary Temperature Model” by Ned Nikolov & Karl Zeller in which they argue that global temperature is purely a function of solar intensity and atmospheric pressure, I worked out some simplifications that would allow me to apply the standard greenhouse effect.
The key was the paper by Robinson & Catling: “Common 0.1 bar tropopause in thick atmospheres set by pressure-dependent infrared transparency” in which they point out that most planets seem to have their tropopause at a pressure of 0.1bar.
Continue reading →

If you haven’t done the survey you still can here.
First, thanks for those who completed the survey – whilst the the numbers are low with about 10 people having answered the survey, as I have to process them by hand, I’m not too fussed as they are already indicative and the effort is low.
The results are as follows:
1. How much did global temperatures change from approximately 1900 to the 2000
The “average” here is 0.6C – which is a little lower than the IPCC estimate.
Continue reading →

[WATU 5]

The first item on the list has got to be Brussel sprouts – as there’s bound to be a rush – because any celebrating of leaving Brussels has got to involve sprouts in some way.
Next is Champagne  – but as that is just pretentious plonk dressed up it’ll be something like an Australian sparkling wine.
I think it should involve some type of bird – mainly so that I can stuff it. So, in retrospect, it’s a pity Turkey didn’t get into the EU in time or it would be the obvious choice. It could be a “swan song” for the EU – but that may be difficult. Out for a duck … that’ll do. What do I stuff it with? Possibly some kind of raspberry concoction? Perhaps Raspberry? No, I think some Oatmeal, leek and apple stuffing. (Scotland, Wales & England) And as sauce … we have the delightful sounding “Guinness gravy”  (N.Ireland) … although the Guinness may never reach the table.
I hate EU adverts – they are just like the EU – they’re the ones that are dubbed are always condescending and ALWAYS some brand I don’t want. So, in reference to them I’ll get British Bacon to put on the duck (in reference to the “Danish” advertising campaign).
In reference to the Euro – and the failing countries of Portugal Ireland Greece & Spain – Pigs in blankets!
For starch … French Fries … no way!! It’ll be that quintessential ancient British custom of chopping things up and frying them in grease … chips.
And  for pudding … it’s got to be rhubarb in reference to all the EU red tape. …. indeed how do we serve it

… as rhubarb crumble!

Some alternatives:

• New Zealand Lamb
• Pancakes with maple syrup
• Curry from Indian
• Hongkong: chinese
• Beef Jerky from S.Africa
• Nigerian Spam

Of course, with the British empire once covering much of the globe, the world is our Oyster in terms of how we celebrate our independence and reuniting with the rest of the world outside the EU.