Overall, for us, this winter has been crazily mild.  While, we did have one spell in December that was cold enough to brown much of the ground vegetation that normally stays green in this part of the country, it has been much warmer than normal for most of the season.

Still, it’s not normal to have daffodils in January, but we have the first blossom of the year – and the forecast is for temperatures above 60°F (15.5°C) for the week ahead.

So is winter over?  Where is all the cold weather? Is this global warming?

Winter’s probably not over here.  Typically, our snowiest month is February, followed by March, and we’ve even had snow in April, though some years we don’t get any snow at all. Last year, on February 9th, we had nearly a foot, and that was the second snow of the week.

On the other hand, spring-like conditions in early February 2008 led to a tornado outbreak that killed 13 in Arkansas (55 in southern US) with widespread damage and power outages.  I wouldn’t be surprised to see more big storms or winter weather in the next month, this year.

While it’s been unusually warm here,the reverse is true in other places.  Alaska has seen some brutally cold weather, worse than normal, and very heavy snow in places.  Sea ice in the Bering Sea is moving south much earlier than normal – and it’s moving fast, threatening to halt the snow-crap harvesting at the peak of the season.  Very cold temperatures and strong winds are pushing the ice south at 10 to 15 miles a day, 5 times the normal rate, threatening $8 million worth of crap pots and other gear already in the water.

In my view, our warmer weather and the colder weather in Alaska are just regional climate variations, not global warming or cooling, not a direct manifestation of climate change, though change is coming – it always is.

Globally,  temperatures have been relatively stable over the last decade.

While warming alarmists tout the decade as the warmest on record, “relatively stable” for more than 10 years isn’t warming.

As I’ve said in previous posts, my view is that we are on the verge of a significant drop in global temperature.  When it starts, if it starts, is anyone’s guess.  The loss of heat may have already begun in the waters of the world, without yet being felt in the weather.

One ominous prediction, though, says that the coming cold may move the geographical center of the corn producing region of North America from Iowa south into Kansas.

I’d rather have global warming.

What has the weather been like recently for you?

I’m running another test of the settings of the plugin to send posts to facebook.

The figure provided with this test is a trend of satellite determined temperature variation for the lower atmosphere of the entire planet.  The figure is published monthly.  The temperature variation (or anomaly) is plotted as a temperature departure from the average value from January 1981 to December 2010.

The high peaks of the running 13 month average at 1998 and 2009 occurred from periods with strong El Ninos.  The drop at the end of the figure corresponds to La Nina periods

Cooling 3.5 degrees Celsius by 2020.

A new Norwegian study predicts that the annual mean temperature in Svalbard will drop 3.5°C over the period of 2009 to 2020 and mean winter temperature will drop 6°C.  The study is based on solar activity and the duration of solar cycles.  While the study is specific to Norway, if this actually occurs, temperatures will also drop significantly in other areas.

Cooling ‘til 2068?

A recent Chinese study of Tibetan tree rings indicates that there is nothing abnormal about the current climate conditions. The research team determined that several different natural cycles – 2-3 years, 100 years, 199 years, 800 years, and 1,324 years – combined to produce the climate history seen in the varying tree ring properties from the Tibetan Plateau.

The study indicate that temperatures have peaked and predicts that they will drop until 2068 AD, rising again after that.

The studies are two of a number of studies that run counter to the anthropogenic global warming theory so prominent in today’s media.

Global warming or global cooling?

If I had a choice, I’d prefer warming.

(I’d also prefer that governments not waste money in futile efforts that aren’t going to make a significant difference.  If we’re going to spend money like that, let’s do something worthwhile – like eradicating malaria or making sure more people in the world have clean water, something that would make a real difference instead of lining the pockets of bureaucrats or eco-snobs.)

In the last couple of days, hundreds of news articles have been reporting on the strange behavior of the sun.

Three new scientific papers released simultaneously June 14th suggest that our sun’s magnetic activity and sunspot cycle may be going somewhat dormant for a while – possibly several decades – resulting in a period of global cooling. The results were announced at the annual meeting of the Solar Physics Division of the American Astronomical Society, which is being held this week at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces.

I’ve been following and writing about the unusual behavior of the sun for quite a while.  I check the status of solar activity and sunspots on a regular basis, sometimes daily.  It’s just a quick check, just to monitor the disparity between what’s been predicted and what is actually occurring.

On March 29, 2009 – a little over 2 years ago – I wrote, “A number of scientists are projecting that global warming is over, for now, and that global average temperatures will be dropping for the next 20 to 30 years.”   Last December, writing about what an extended lull in solar activity might mean, I said, “Bottom line – it’s going to get colder.”

I don’t want to be right on this.

During the Dalton Minimum, a period of low solar activity lasting from about 1790 to 1830, frigid winters and cold summers resulted in massive crop failures, famine and death.  The Maunder Minimum, from about 1645 to 1715, also corresponded to a period of low solar activity and coincided with the coldest part of the Little Ice Age.

I’d rather have global warming.

Other factors could mitigate or exacerbate the effect of this solar slumber.  It is already being suggested that anthropogenic global warming – warming caused by human carbon emissions – for example, could mitigate how cold it gets.  It is also being suggested by some that , rather cooling, this might merely temper the impact of global warming.

Unfortunately, I think that society will come to learn that anthropogenic global warming has already done all that it do.

A couple of things come to mind that could cause this to be worse – increased volcanic activity and the shifting of major ocean currents from their warm phase to the cold phase.  As we’ve seen in recent news reports, volcanic activity seems to be on the rise.  As well, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, a cyclic thermal phenomenon in the Pacific Ocean that lasts several decades, is shifting out of its warm phase into its cold phase.

I really do not want to be right on this.

_______

The image below is a composite of the solar sunspot predictions from 4 years ago and the actual results as of December 2010.  The red lines are smoothed high and low predicted values from 2007.  The blue lines are actual monthly results and smoothed monthly results from December 2010.

This month’s weather has been very cruel in parts of the United States. A long-standing record for the number of April tornados has been broken – with a great many lives lost – and with the current North American temperature conditions, more may be coming in the next few weeks.

Tornados occur every year in North America, usually in the spring, starting in the southern part of the central United States and moving northward as the season progresses.  However, tornados have occurred in every month of the year and in every state of the United States – though not unknown in other parts of the world, by far the largest percentage of tornados occur in the USA, which averages about 1,200 tornados a year.

While there is a lot known about tornados and the conditions from which they tend to develop, there is still a lot unknown and, perhaps, some aspects that will forever be unknowable.

Strong winds, strong wind shear (significant differences in speed and direction of wind, varying with height), an unstable atmosphere and abundant low-level humidly are all contributors to the formation of tornadoes.  Wind shear, “the kind which develops when cold and warm air masses ‘collide’”¹ is the key.

Active tornado seasons in the U.S. are almost always due to unusually COOL air persisting over the Midwest and Ohio Valley longer than it normally does as we transition into spring. ¹

Lately, I’ve been watching and reading weather predictions from a new meteorological consulting firm, WeatherBell Analytics LLC, where Joe Bastardi, formerly of AccuWeather, said on April 2oth:

While the next 5 days sees another moderate outbreak of severe weather this weekend ( and the snow again on the northern side) its next week another lawyers, guns and money outbreak takes place. We are liable to see another 100 to 200 tornadoes before the month is out, making it the most active April ever. My reasoning for this is based on the major, and progressive, trough that swings into the plains early next week, and is leading a major crushing of the eastern ridge that will then take us into a May much like 2008 temp and precip wise.

It’s natural for people to want to find a reason when something bad happens and, all too often lately, the favorite culprit of anything bad in nature is climate change (aka global warming).  However, tornadoes are one feature of nature that is not predicted by global warming theory.  If anything, a warming globe would reduce the frequency of tornadoes.

It is well known that strong to violent tornado activity in the U.S. has decreased markedly since statistics began in the 1950s, which has also been a period of average warming. So, if anything, global warming causes FEWER tornado outbreaks…not more. In other words, more violent tornadoes would, if anything, be a sign of “global cooling”, not “global warming”.¹

The ever improving weather knowledge of forecasters and meteorologists doubtlessly gave sufficient warning that saved many lives this month.

With every passing day, it seems, more precise digital tools emerge to clarify the inner heart of a storm cell in rampage. And yet, for all that solid information, the natural world can still seem murky, unpredictable and downright scary when it roars into full-throated chaos.

Tornadoes in particular, researchers say, straddle the line between the known and the profoundly unknowable.²

__________

¹ MORE Tornadoes from Global Warming? That’s a Joke, Right? – Dr. Roy Spencer
² Predicting Tornadoes: It’s Still a Guessing Game – The New York Times

See more comics from Calamities of Nature

Whether it’s weather or climate – it’s all in the accuracy of the models and the accuracy model assumptions and data that the models are fed.

If the assumptions and/or data are off, what can be said about the results?

By most indicators, the Sun is not behaving as expected at this point in the solar cycle – and it hasn’t been for quite a while.  The most visible indicator of solar activity – the number of sunspots – is far lower than normal.  Over the last few days, the Sun’s surface facing Earth has been spotless.

We are currently in Solar Cycle 24.

The figure on the right, above, is a composite of historical monthly sunspot numbers as of early December from NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center superimposed over the same figure from March 2007.  The red lines represent the 2007  predicted maximum and minimum monthly sunspot counts.  The current average monthly count, which should be ramping up to the cycle’s maximum, is far below what was anticipated.

In a paper published March 2006, David Archibald predicted that Solar Cycles 24 and 25 would be very much like Solar Cycle 5 and 6 – the Dalton Minimum.  Nearly two years into Cycle 24, the pattern he predicted appears to be developing.

So what was the Dalton Minimum and what might a similar period mean for the modern world?

Bottom line – it’s going to get colder.

The Dalton Minimum was a period of low solar activity that lasted from about 1790 to 1830 in which global temperatures were also lower than average. If we are entering into a similar “modern” minimum and the correlation of colder global temperatures hold true, global “warming” may stop and global temperatures may drop through the end of the minimum.

By many indicators, global temperatures appear to have been relatively stable for nearly a decade – or more – already, except for perturbations caused by climate features such as the Arctic Oscillation, El Nino, and La Nina.

Some scientists believe that the recent warming that has been seen is simply a natural recovery from the cold period of the Little Ice Age, which may have resulted from several low solar activity periods. If that is the case, even if temperature were to drop over the next couple of decades, the overall trend, since the end of the Little Ice Age, may be maintained, temperatures may drop for the next 20 to 30 years.

Previous related posts:

• The Sun Has Lost Its Spots, January 31, 2009
• It’s going to get frosty, March 19, 2009
• The Sun Has Lost Its Spots – Part 2, April 6, 2009
• The Sun has found some spots – May 1, 2009
• The Sun has lost its spots – part 3 – June 28, 2009
• 700 blank days and counting – August 27, 2009
• The Sun has lost its spots – part 4. – September 17, 1010

In Australia, climate change initiatives have been delayed until at least 2013.  Despite that, the Federal Climate Change Department is not considering any cutbacks or layoffs.

TAXPAYERS will fork out $90 million a year to keep more than 400 public servants employed within the Federal Climate Change Department – despite most of them now having nothing to do until 2013.

More than 60 of them are classified as senior executive staff on salaries between $168,000 and $298,000 a year. Their salary bill alone will cost an estimated $12 million every year.

A further $8 million will also be paid in rent for plush offices at Canberra’s Constitution Place until 2012, where it is believed 500 new computers will be delivered this week.

It can be revealed that despite Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s decision on Tuesday to suspend the failed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme until at least 2013, the department has ruled out plans to cut back staff.

Read the full Herald Sun article – Kevin Rudd’s Department of Hot Air costing taxpayers $90m

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is getting a lot of heat these days on the claim that the Himalayan glaciers will be gone by 2035.

While the information used by the IPCC is supposed to be peer-reviewed and well vetted, it turns out that this gem is derived from a magazine article in New Science several years ago that was based on a single phone call to an Indian scientist.

An IBD Editorial says:

The scientists who said that Himalayan glaciers will be gone by 2035 have admitted the claim has as much credibility as sightings of the mythical Yeti. It’s their fraudulent claims that are melting away.

We hesitate to call it Glacier-gate, but the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the U.N. body tasked with scaring us to death about global warming, has admitted that the claim in its 2007 report about the Himalayan glaciers disappearing was not based on any scientific study or research. It was instead based on one scientist’s speculation in a telephone interview with a reporter.

This issue has been hitting a number of other media sites over the last week or so.

Read the rest of the  IBD Editorial at Investors.com.

Telegraph.uk.co, December 14, 2009, quoting Tony Blair

Following the ‘climategate scandal’, Mr Blair said the science may not be “as certain as its proponents allege”.

But he said the world should act as a precaution against floods, droughts and mass extinction caused by climate change, in fact it would be “grossly irresponsible” not to.

BBC News, December 14, 2009

Negotiations at the UN climate summit have been suspended after developing countries withdrew their co-operation.

Delegations were angry at what they saw as moves by the Danish host government to sideline talks on more emission cuts under the Kyoto Protocol.

GlobalWarming.org, December 14, 2009

Today’s dominant mindset that any climate change at all is bad is puzzling. It implicitly assumes that today’s climate is the best of all possible climates. Maybe that’s true. But maybe it isn’t. The trouble is that few climate activists seem to have had that thought. The idea of change is so scary that nobody has the presence of mind to ask if that’s a problem or not.

Reuters.com, December 14, 2009

The head of the Asian Development Bank said on Sunday that rich countries’ offers of funds to developing countries for measures to mitigate or adapt to climate change remain insufficient a week into U.N. talks.

ADB President Haruhiko Kuroda also told Reuters in an interview that if governments were to fail to reach a climate deal in Copenhagen, it could lead to a collapse of the carbon market which would hit efforts to deal with climate change.

GlobalWarming.org, December 14, 2009

It has always been hard to persuade the public that invisible gases could somehow warm the planet, and that they had to make sacrifices to prevent that from happening. It seemed, on the verge of Copenhagen, as if that might be about to be achieved.

“But he says all that ended on Nov. 20. ‘The e-mails represented a seminal moment in the climate debate of the last five years, and it was a moment that broke decisively against us. I think the CRU leak is nothing less than catastrophic.’”

While I’m moving on – or back – to other things, climate issues will continue to be an interest. With 5 of my last 6 posts being on the subject, it’s time to look at other things.  I’ll try to figure out a way to continue to share some of what I learn, though, without this becoming a climate change blog.

I’m still happy with Windows 7.  My computer at work uses XP, though, and moving back and forth between Windows 7 and XP makes getting used to Windows 7 a little harder, I think.

Yes, I am still working.  A contract extension has been approved and, assuming the VP signs the funding paperwork, I will be there until about the middle of March.  After that, I plan not to work for at least the rest of 2010.

Regular visitors to Exit 78 may recognize that my theme has changed once again.  I have moved to the Thesis theme, which allows a lot more control over the appearance.  I’ve got the basic structure down pretty good now, but I’ll be tweaking on it, so there may be subtle changes day to day.

I still have a little bit of material to post from our September trip, photo galleries to develop and publish and images from the great depression to share.

Moving on.

December 14, 2009

DOE Litigation Hold Notice

DOE-SR has received a “Litigation Hold Notice” from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) General Council and the DOE Office of Inspector General regarding the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England. Accordingly, they are requesting that SRNS, SRR and other Site contractors locate and preserve all documents, records, data, correspondence, notes, and other materials, whether official or unofficial, original or duplicative, drafts or final versions, partial or complete that may relate to the global warming, including, but not limited to, the contract files, any related correspondence files, and any records, including emails or other correspondence, notes, documents, or other material related to this contract, regardless of its location or medium on which it is stored. In other words, please preserve any and all documents relevant to “global warming, the Climate Research Unit at he University of East Anglia In England, and/or climate change science.”

As a reminder, this Litigation Hold preservation obligation supersedes any existing statutory or regulatory document retention period or destructive schedule. The determination of what information may be potentially relevant is based upon content and substance and generally does not depend on the type of medium on which the information exists. The information requested may exist in various forms, including paper records, hand-written notes, telephone log entries, email, and other electronic communication (including voicemail), word processing documents (including drafts, spreadsheets, databases, and calendars), telephone logs, electronic address books, PDAs (like Palm Pilots and Blackberries), internet usage files, systems manuals, and network access information in their original format. All ESI should be preserved in its originally-created, or “native” format, along with related metadata. Relevant backup tapes and all indexes for those tapes should also be preserved. Further, information that is reasonably accessible must nonetheless be preserved, because such sources will, at the very least, need to be identified and, under compelling circumstances, may need to be produced.

If you have any doubts as to whether specific information is responsive, err on the side of preserving that information.

Any employee who has information covered by this Litigation Hold is requested to contact Madeline Screven, Paralegal, SRNS Office of General Council, 5-4634, for additional instructions.

(From Watts Up With That)

Michael L. Wamsted
Associate General Council”

.

Many scientists and others who are skeptical of anthropogenic global warming would like the answer to one question that, so far, has not been answered:

While there is laboratory evidence that carbon dioxide acts as a greenhouse gas and carbon dioxide and global temperature have both been rising, real world proof that CO2 has caused the rise in global temperature does NOT exist.

While, at times,  there appears to be a rough correlation between CO2 and global temperature, correlation does not prove causation.

Even though anthropogenic global warming is an unproven hypothesis, it is likely that some historical warming resulted from carbon dioxide released to the atmosphere by humans. However, because of the physical properties of CO2, it’s done all the warming it can do.

Predictions of rising temperatures and the dire consequences of anthropogenic global warming are based on computer climate models.  The climate models include the assumption that global temperatures will rise as CO2 continues to rise.

Over the last decade, global temperatures have leveled off while CO2 continued to rise.  Temperature is trending below all of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predictions.

Joanne Nova, an Australian freelance science presenter & writer: Professional speaker, author, and former TV host, has prepared and published two excellent — and free — booklets on global warming.  The first, The Skeptics Handbook, has been translated by volunteers into many other languages, including German, French, Norwegian, Finnish, Swedish, Turkish, Portuguese, Japanese, and Danish.

Carbon dioxide acts as a greenhouse gas by absorbing infrared radiation in three narrow bands of frequencies, (2.7, 4.3 and 15 micrometers (µM)), meaning that most of the heat producing infrared radiation frequencies escapes absorption by CO2.  The main peak, 15 µM, is absorbed completely within about 10 meters of the ground meaning that there is no more to absorb.  Doubling the human contribution of CO2 would reduce this distance. Reducing the distance for absorption would not result in an increase in temperature.

The sun appears to have entered a less active period and is providing less warmth to the Earth.  The sun is in an extended solar minimum that was predicted to end in March 2008, nearly 20 months ago.  Since 2004 there have been 770 days without sunspots.  A typical solar minimum averages about 485 days.  Solar magnetic activity continues to drop.

A number of scientists are projecting that global warming is over, for now, and that global average temperatures will be dropping for the next 20 to 30 years.

“Tricks” apparently have been performed on more climate data than just the tree ring proxy information.  The figure below shows the adjustments made to the historical temperature record of Darwin, Australia.  The blue lines show the values for the original, “raw” temperature data. The red lines are the official NOAA/GHCN  ( National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration — Global Historical Climate Network) data  after the values have been “homogenized” and averaged.  The black line are the values for the adjustment that was made (uses the scale on the right of the figure).

“Before getting homogenized, temperatures in Darwin were falling at 0.7 Celcius per century … but after the homogenization, they were warming at 1.2 Celcius per century. And the adjustment that they made was over two degrees per century …” – Willis Eschenbach, The Smoking Gun At Darwin Zero

American climate sceptics are now demanding a thorough investigation of NASA’s earth science programme, including the possibility that instruments on its satellites have been “tweaked” to give a “correct” result, and pointing out that the agency has repeatedly had to correct its data, going back to the 1930s. The common factor between CRU East Anglia and NASA is the destruction or withholding of research models and data which, if they are reliable, should be their pride and joy – documentation that would secure these institutions’ place in history, like Einstein’s equations. Telegraph.co.uk

“They’ve lost the raw data on which all the models, all the computer generated forecasts, the graphs and projections, are based.”

“Poor Al Gore”

Climate politics continue to be interesting.  Australia’s opposition Liberal Party has ousted its leader, Malcolm Turnbull, after the resignation last week of several senators from their “front-seat” positions.  The Aussie government’s climate change bill is now in jeopardy, raising the potential of an early general election in 2010.

The Climategate emails and documents are being investigated by a number of organizations, including an inquiry by Penn State University, where Michael Mann, creator of the discredited hockey stick graph – used by Al Gore in An Inconvenient Truth – is a professor. Inquiries are also under way at the University of East Anglia, the source of the leaked material.  Government investigations are either ongoing or pending and there has been at least one civil lawsuit filed.

At a minimum, the emails document the violation of UK Freedom of Information laws.

Many believe that the leaker was not a hacker, but, rather, was an insider acting as a anonymous whistleblower by leaking the emails and documents, including information that had been unsuccessfully been sought under the UK FOI statutes.

The emails are not the only incriminating material.  Computer codes and their documentation show fudged numbers and “blatant data-cooking” that tell a story of twisting reality to a desired view.

Many of the fantastic claims in the media about climate change are likely predicated on the same sort of skewed science.

An article in the Wall Street Journal titled The Climate Science Isn’t Settled, by Richard S. Lindzen, professor of meteorology at MIT gives a more balanced view of the state of climate science.

Claims that climate change is accelerating are bizarre. There is general support for the assertion that GATA has increased about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit since the middle of the 19th century. The quality of the data is poor, though, and because the changes are small, it is easy to nudge such data a few tenths of a degree in any direction. Several of the emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) that have caused such a public ruckus dealt with how to do this so as to maximize apparent changes.

While I have been skeptical of global warming claims for quite some time, this Climategate fiasco appears to show  a conspiracy to doctor the evidence.

In my interest in climate change, I wasn’t looking for a conspiracy, just the truth.

While I have spent a bit of time reading some of the emails that were leaked earlier the week, I simply do not have the time – or desire – to delve deeply into the files.  There are many others around the world digging into this.

I think that there have been serious consequences that have resulted from the actions of some of the scientists whose correspondence has been leaked.  In their zeal to “prove” — at all costs — CO2 as the cause of anthropogenic global warming, other potential causes have been marginalized.  Evidence is mounting that changes in land use may have a significantly greater impact on climate change than rising CO2.  If true, mitigation and adaptation to successfully address human impacts on climate could be done at a fraction of the cost of  the drastic actions and expenses that are being called for today.  It may be that efforts could have been started a decade ago, but for an obsession on CO2 as the global warming culprit.

On Examiner.com, Thomas Fuller is writing a series of articles regarding the actions and communications of a group of climate scientists and paleoclimatologists known as The Team. Click here to read Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5 , Part 6, and Part 7.

My first post on this was Climategate.

While I haven’t blogged about it for a while, I read material related to global warming climate change every day, so it was with great interest yesterday morning that I read of the release of allegedly stolen anthropogenic global warming climate change correspondence.

I had woken early for some reason and was unable to get back to sleep.  By 4:30, I was up and checking email, blogs and the news-feeds that I subscribe to.

A little over an hour later, I was downloading the files.

It’s going to be interesting to see where this is going to end up.  Articles are already appearing in the mainstream media.

See new article: Climategate update.

The Sun has Lost it’s Spots (continued)

Today, it reached a count of 700 days.

On average, a solar minimum has 485 days where the surface of the sun is blank, with no sunspots appearing.  The solar minimum is the period in a sunspot cycle where the number of observed sunspots  is at its lowest. Sunspot cycles  average 11 years from beginning of minimum through maximum and back to the beginning of the next minimum.

The current solar minimum began in 2004 and was predicted to end late in 2007.

Since the minimum began, there have been 700 days with no sunspots.

The last observed sunspot disappeared 47 days ago.  If there are no sunspots by this time next week, this will have been the longest period without any sunspots during this minimum.

Long solar minimums have been observed in the past. However, this is the first long minimum where we have had sensitive instruments that can monitor the sun.

The jury is still out on the meaning of this extended minimum.

Advocates of the hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming discount any significant change in the energy received from the sun.  Others, however, point to previous periods of low sunspot and solar activity, which, by chance, happened to roughly correspond to the cold times of the Little Ice Age and the Dark Ages.

(to be continued in about a month or so)

Note: Previous posts on the sun were The Sun Has Lost Its Spots (Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3) and The Sun Has Found Some Spots. I will be posting a continuation update about monthly.)

Peter Sissons, a veteran British newsman, left BBC’s Television Centre for the last time in June, without a “pang of regret.”

In The Mail of Sunday, July 15th,  he launched a blistering attack on the BBC, claiming standards have dropped and producers are too concerned about being politically correct to do anything about it.

His article was an interesting read and, given my growing disillusion over the news media and what I believe to be a misrepresentation of the facts on climate change, I was particularly interested in the part of the article that talked about the BBC position on global warming.

Mr. Sissons writes:

On a wintry Saturday last December, there was what was billed as a major climate change rally in London.

The leader of the Green Party, Caroline Lucas, went into the Westminster studio to be interviewed by me on the BBC News channel. She clearly expected what I call a ‘free hit’; to be allowed to voice her views without being challenged on them.

I pointed out to her that the climate didn’t seem to be playing ball at the moment. We were having a particularly cold winter, even though carbon emissions were increasing. Indeed, there had been no warming for ten years, contradicting all the alarming computer predictions.

Well, she was outraged. I don’t have the actual transcript, but Miss Lucas told me angrily that it was disgraceful that the BBC – the BBC! – should be giving any kind of publicity to those sort of views.

I believe I am one of a tiny number of BBC interviewers who have so much as raised the possibility that there is another side to the debate on climate change.

The Corporation’s most famous interrogators invariably begin by accepting that ‘the science is settled’, when there are countless reputable scientists and climatologists producing work that says it isn’t.

But it is effectively BBC policy, enthusiastically carried out by the BBC environment correspondents, that those views should not be heard – witness the BBC statement last year that ‘BBC News currently takes the view that their reporting needs to be calibrated to take into account the scientific consensus that global warming is man-made’.

Politically the argument may be settled, but any inquisitive journalist can find ample evidence that scientifically it is not.

I was not proud to be working for an organisation with a corporate mind so closed on such an important issue. Disquiet over my interview with Miss Lucas, incidentally, went right to the top at the BBC although, naturally, they never sought to discuss it with me.

For me, this is not an issue about the climate, it is an issue about the duty of the journalist.

I suspect the policy of most major media outlets on climate change is similar to the BBC’s.

day 61

Sunspot 1024, July 7, 2009

Spot-free, July 27, 2009

In the first week of July, many observers thought that the long blank solar minimum was coming to an end when a large cycle 24 sunspot group developed.  However, after several days, it was fading away to nothing as the sun’s surface rotated it over the horizon.

Since then, the sun has gone back to being sunspot free, other than a brief period when it appeared that an old cycle sunspot — cycle 23 — was trying to develop. However, except perhaps briefly, it wasn’t observed on visible light images of the sun and, thus, was not counted as an actual sunspot.

Spotless Days

The current stretch of spotless days is 17.

The sun has been spotless just over ¾ of the year to date.  (159 days, 76%)

The sun has been spotless 670 days since the beginning of the current solar minimum in 2004.

In a typical solar minimum, there are about 485 spotless days.

What does it mean?

It depends on who you ask.

Some think that the lack of sunspots is indicative of a quiet sun and a cooling period that may last for 20 to 30 years or more.

Others say that the reduction of the energy from the sun during a solar minimum is only 0.1% and that it will have no impact on the warming of the earth that is taking place.

Time will tell.

__________

Related Posts:

• The Sun Has Lost Its Spots
• The Sun Has Lost Its Spots — Part 2
• The Sun has found some spots

day 55