Climate Scientist Starter Kit Working With Curves

Shows how to use the Climate Scientist Starter Kit to work with curves so common to climate data.

This video has been placed in the public domain.

Climate Scientist Starter Kit, Version 1.5

The Climate Scientist Starter Kit has been updated to version 1.5. There's lots of new data and this video explains what you'll find.

This video has been placed in the public domain.

Climate Scientist Starter Kit Simple Data Analysis

This video shows you how to do some simple data analysis with the Climate Scientist Starter Kit spreadsheet. It includes an example of re-creating Svensmark's cosmic ray and tropospheric temperature graph.

This video has been placed in the public domain.

Climate Scientist Starter Kit Introduction Video

This video is a walkthrough and explanation of the data found in the Climate Scientist Starter Kit spreadsheet.

The video has been placed in the public domain.

Climate Scientist Starter Kit In Action

The above chart shows a sample of what you can do with the Climate Scientist Starter Kit. It shows the Global Mean Temperature anomaly (red) adjusted for TDYN, ENSO, and Volcano effects, compared to the low level cloud cover (blue). Both data sets are monthly data for the period from July, 1983 to June 2008. Both sets show the trend line for the data.

As low level clouds go down, the temperature goes up.

Happy New Year. :)

References:
Climate Scientist Starter Kit

Climate Scientist Starter Kit

I've just put together a Climate Scientist Starter Kit. The kit contains a spreadsheet in Apple Numbers and Microsoft Excel formats. The spreadsheet has data on:

* Monthly Global Mean, TDYN, ENSO, and Volcano temperatures from January, 1900 till March 2009.
* Monthly UAH satellite temperature data from December, 1978 till November 2009.
* Daily and monthly Cosmic Ray data from January, 1951 till November, 2006.
* Monthly low level cloud data from July, 1983 through June, 2008.
* Ice Core CO2 data and monthly CO2 data for the years 1958 through 2008.

It nice because you have all the data in an easy to use spreadsheet, rather than having to parse up various data formats.

There's also supporting data, including raw cloud data, daily cloud data, C++ code for parsing raw cloud data files, and HTML documents that provide additional information.

You can download the zip file here. NOTE: The comment on the download page will say it's the FreePOOMA Add-On Pack. Don't worry, that's just the name of the project that contains the zip file.

Feedback for improvements for future versions of the kit is welcome.

References:
The Climate Scientist Starter Kit

Cosmic Rays And Climate. Part V: Cosmoclimatology

This video has been placed in the public domain.

Cosmic Rays And Climate. Part IV: CO2 Global Warming

This video has been placed in the public domain.

Cosmic Rays And Climate. Part III: Clouds

This video has been placed in the public domain.

COP15 Flops

Senator Inhofe said it best. I can only add "Get used to it."

Next up, the EPA.

References:
TreeHugger

Cosmic Rays And Climate. Part II: Plasma Physics

This video has been placed in the pubic domain.

Obama, Scientists, Take Climate Approval Rating Hit

According to the Washington Post, Obama's approval rating on handling global warming has dropped below 50%. It's not clear how much of this is due to Climategate, as the "approve" trend was heading downward at about the same rate before the story broke. However, the "disapprove" trend does show an increase in growth after Climategate.

The poll was conducted by telephone Thursday the 10th through Sunday the 13th.



The poll showed that most people thought Obama should cap greenhouse gases by a 2-1 margin, so long as that cap didn't cost very much. If the costs to a household were $25 per month, the responses were nearly evenly split between the "shoulds" and "should nots".

According to documents obtained from the Obama administration via the Freedom of Information Act, average monthly increase in costs per household would be between $73 and $146.


Trust in scientists took a big hit, with 40% saying they don't trust scientists on this issue at all or only very little. 30% said they had moderate trust, while 29% said they trust scientists completely or a lot.


By a 2-1 margin people said they believe scientists disagree with each other over this issue.

References:
Washington Post Article
Washington Post Graph
Obama Administration FOIA Documents

Cosmic Rays And Climate. Part I: Quantum Physics

This video has been placed in the public domain.

Updated (Again) Cap And Trade Video

New information keeps pouring in about the seedy connections that make up "Cap and Trade". This one includes info on the head of the IPCC.

This video has been placed in the public domain.

R.I.P. AGW 1988 - 2009

'

This video has been placed in the public domain.

Updated Cap And Trade Video

The new version includes information recently obtained via the Freedom of Information Act.

This video has been placed in the public domain.

ClimateGate And The Mainstream Media

Examines possible reasons the MSM is trying to ignore ClimateGate.

This video has been placed in the public domain.

Happy Fun Ball

This video has been placed in the public domain.

I'm Sorry

The video and images have been placed in the public domain.

References
Goldman Sachs
Deutsche Bank
Société Générale

CRU Code Not Smoking Gun

The graph presented here shows the data manipulation taking place in one example of the computer code from CRU. Many (most? all?) of my fellow climate skeptics are saying this is the "smoking gun" that proves CRU has manipulated its climate data.

It's not.

I've been a professional computer programmer for over 25 years. There's several things that stood out as odd to me about the CRU code. I've been holding off posting about it until it all came together for me. I think it has now.

*) First of all, the code is written in a language called IDL. IDL is a popular language in the scientific community, including climate science. However, it execution is slow so it's not good at handling large data sets. It's also not a well structured language, so it's not well suited for building large, complex systems. Climate models have large data sets and are complex. Because of this, professional grade models usually use FORTRAN, not IDL.

*) Secondly, the code is terrible. Truly terrible. The hacked code is not in any way a professional product, but looks more like it was written by someone who either had no experience in programming beyond an introductory course or who was writing "throw away" code for some purpose other than creating a final professional result.

*) Third, the programmer knew they were a terrible programmer. In the comments in the code the programmer refers to his own lack of skill over and over again. I can't see such a person using that code to create data that would be even glanced at by a climate scientist.

*) Fourth, the data was terrible. According to the programmer who wrote the code, it was a complete mess and had to be heavily altered to get anything close to real world values. We can all say what we will about Phil Jones but three of the grants he received at CRU were for creating climate databases. It seems unlikely that he'd have gotten such grants repeatedly if his databases produced data that had no resemblance to the real world.

So what's it all add up to?

To me it seems the code in the leaked files is toy code using a toy database used to convert small data samples in a quick and dirty way without the need for a supercomputer and the programs running on the supercomputer. Nothing more.

But we'll never know for sure until CRU releases its official code to the world, allowing it to be reviewed by outside professionals.

References
CRU Files
NASA FORTRAN Climate Model
Wikipedia IDL page