tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post2591221794427794105..comments2024-02-06T09:51:14.027+01:00Comments on Jules' klimaatblog: Labohm. Again. Sigh.juleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08149218335071592373noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-64731589508109470772009-10-12T15:27:12.199+02:002009-10-12T15:27:12.199+02:00Gerard,
hij tracht wel degelijk echt met dat graf...Gerard,<br /><br />hij tracht wel degelijk echt met dat grafiekje mensen te doen geloven dat er helemaal géén correlatie is tussen CO2 en temperatuur. <br /><br />Iets waarvan hijzelf weet dat dat niet zo is. <br /><br />Ik wéét waarom ik zo onverbiddelijk ben voor die man. En slechts die man.juleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08149218335071592373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-44749438105741772042009-10-11T23:21:21.671+02:002009-10-11T23:21:21.671+02:00Marco, I chose to start at 1970 because you mentio...Marco, I chose to start at 1970 because you mentioned that date not because I wanted to cherrypick on a low solar cycle. In general I think one solar cycle could only affect local weather not global climate. You have to look on a longer timescale. So looking at differences within one cycle is nonsense anyway: there are far too much feedback cycles that hide the effects temporarily. That climatologists still try to model that variety and then say the sun is responsible for so and so percent is pretty ridiculous in my view and arrogant too. That the sun was at his highest activity in the last part of the last century becomes clear from looking at the C14 figures and Beryllium and is also clear from the link I provided. That high activity has stopped now with the beginning of cycle 24. In the next couple of years it will become clear what is really forcing the climateUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01250598758351523242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-4394914689387446022009-10-11T22:33:51.416+02:002009-10-11T22:33:51.416+02:00Jules, Ik ga ervan uit dat Labohm wel de correlati...Jules, Ik ga ervan uit dat Labohm wel de correlatie de "andere kant op" erkent(hogere temperaturen leiden tot meer CO2) maar ik ben Labohm niet. Ik vermoed dus dat hij zich ongelukkig uitgedrukt heeft. Als hij helemaal geen correlatie erkend dan heeft hij inderdaad ongelijk.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01250598758351523242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-53283284573729739342009-10-11T16:30:38.178+02:002009-10-11T16:30:38.178+02:00Gerard,
Labohm isn't just denying the causati...Gerard,<br /><br />Labohm isn't just denying the causation, he's really denying the correlation at all.<br /><br />his exact words in Dutch (my emphasis) :<br /><br />Op geen enkele tijdschaal – miljoenen, honderdduizenden, duizenden, honderden en tientallen jaren – is er een <b>correlatie</b> tussen CO2 en temperaturen.<br /><br />(in english : not a single time scale will show a correlation between CO2 and temp)<br /><br />This is both incorret, and given the chronology in my post, he is perfectly aware that it is incorrect, which doesn't stop him from using both this claim, and the misleading graph.juleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08149218335071592373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-64609668106970364872009-10-11T12:37:20.772+02:002009-10-11T12:37:20.772+02:00Let's start with the sunspot number:
http://si...Let's start with the sunspot number:<br />http://sidc.oma.be/news/113/wolf-en.jpg<br />Absolutely no correlation. Starting at 1970 is cherry picking, and even then it does not work. Cycle 20 was relatively weak, but cycles 21 and 22 were of equal magnitude, and cycle 23 only marginally smaller. And highest in thousands of years? Not according to NASA nor the Belgian observatory. Here cycle 19 was the highest, funnily enough right in the period where temperatures went somewhat down...<br /><br />Note that research has shown that the sunspot cycle (from top to bottom) may contribute up to 0.2 degrees in temperature variation. You can calculate yourself what effect to expect if the cycle gives a sunspotmaximum that varies by about 25%.<br /><br />TSI can't be the issue either, since that would contradict cooling of the stratosphere.<br /><br />CMEs up? (ejections, not explosions, BTW). Where's the evidence? And please don't point to the measurements using widely different instruments. The latest observatory instrument, in function since 1996, by its very design picks up many more CMEs than previous instruments. And it sees no increase to my knowledge.<br />Note also that this paper discussed some aspects, and does not note any "up up up":<br />http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FIAU%2FIAU2004_IAUS223%2FS1743921304006696a.pdf&code=fba73c556f7ebaed454f2789ffa4ab4d<br /><br />The fact that Kees de Jager still believes it's the sun indicates that he just can't accept that his preferred study object doesn't have enough influence.Marcohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07262670367947223521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-20575462366056932402009-10-11T11:52:41.301+02:002009-10-11T11:52:41.301+02:00Solar activity has several components. Some of the...Solar activity has several components. Some of them like the CME's (coronal mass explosions) went also up up up. You can ask prof De Jager about it who is a solar physicist. But also if you take the sunspots as a measure and start at 1970 there was a solar increase. Above that all cycli after 1970 except the present one had an exceptionally high activity, highest in thousands of years. Read for instance the Volkskrant: [url=http://www.volkskrant.nl/archief_gratis/article984588.ece/De_zon_knalt_als_zelden_tevoren]link[/url]Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01250598758351523242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-18717232031345136202009-10-11T08:27:37.166+02:002009-10-11T08:27:37.166+02:00Ignoring the sun at the end of the last century? T...Ignoring the sun at the end of the last century? The whole thing about the sun is that there has been no increase of solar intensity since about 1970, exactly where the temperature went up, up, up!Marcohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07262670367947223521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-89854201762114314322009-10-10T22:59:58.958+02:002009-10-10T22:59:58.958+02:00What Labohm means is that there is no causal corre...What Labohm means is that there is no causal correlation between CO2 and temperature as in CO2 leading to higher temperatures. Rather the other way around as climate sceptics like to interpret the long timescale graph. So as he agrees with higher temperatures leading to higher CO2 levels (with a time lag) he is not frauding when he disagrees with CO2 leading to higher temperatures. There is nothing wrong with the 10 year graph showing no increase in global temperatures (there wasn't any as becomes clearer every day) while there was an increase in CO2. You can argue that that time interval is short but alarmist scientists do and did the same things. An example are the articles which try to ignore the influence of the sun at the end of the last century: see for instance "no solar hiding place for greenhouse sceptics".Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01250598758351523242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-5668684251855173482009-07-17T03:36:42.705+02:002009-07-17T03:36:42.705+02:00The question arises, why the correlation between i...The question arises, why the correlation between industry apologists/deniers and right-wing conservatism? Well... The folowing is an example of some of the fascinating stuff that saw me pretty much abandon my mycological studies after witnessing the bizarre responses to 9/11, and pursuing theories that combined social behavior/development and biological evolution. I may not go back! LOL<br /><br />"Conceptual Definitions of conservative ideology. <br />Definitions of conservatism stress “the disposition and tendency to preserve what is established; opposition to change” (Neilson, 1958) and “the disposition in politics to maintain the existing order” (Morris,1976). Traditionalism and hostility to social innovation were central to Mannheim’s analysis of conservatism. Rossiter too defined conservatism as “an attitude of opposition to disruptive change in the social, economic, legal, religious, political, or cultural order” He added, “The distinguishing mark of conservatism is the fear of change<br />which becomes transformed in the political arena into the fear of radicalism”. <br /><br />Clearly AGW poses a huge threat to the status quo of free-market capitalism. Knowing what we do about their ability to dismiss basically the whole of science simply in order to preserve their chidhood belief in a Creator, dismissing AGW should come quite easily for them. <br /><br />"This possibility is suggested by the theory of System Justification, which hypothesizes that (a) there is an ideological motivation to defend the existing social system against instability, threat, and attack and (b) this motivation is stronger among proponents of right-wing than of left-wing ideology (Jost et al., 2001).Mycoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14810219250804482121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-44289449080236653002009-06-11T09:29:04.118+02:002009-06-11T09:29:04.118+02:00Hij doet het weer / he did it again:
http://www.da...Hij doet het weer / he did it again:<br />http://www.dagelijksestandaard.nl/2009/06/10/wat-te-doen-tegen-de-onophoudelijke-misleidende-klimaatinformatie/JvdLaannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-4211235737314976142009-03-29T10:16:00.000+02:002009-03-29T10:16:00.000+02:00I freely admitted that I did not know what kriging...I freely admitted that I did not know what kriging was. But that was not the point.<BR/>The point is, Hans Erren fails to understand what Europe actually is. He thinks 4 stations represents the whole of Europe, excluding Scandinavia, Great Britain and Ireland, the Iberian and Italian Penininsula and the Balkans and so on!! <BR/>But no, he continues to boast he knows something his readers fail to understand. <BR/>Moreover one of his series showed a warming trend as pointed out by one of the other readers, yet he continues to propagate that warming in Europa has stopped since 1994! But that does not sink in Hans Erren.<BR/>Hans Erren is not a real scientist. He starts with a conclusion and searches for data that confirms his conclusion. That type of strategy was clearly shown in his postings about Shismaref. He had to look for his data after he made his statement that Shismaref was not shrinking. And it does not matter if Shismaref is shrinking or not and whether he is was right or night, the way he works is clearly an nonscientific approach! <BR/>And in the end he calls us alarmists.<BR/><BR/>Jvdlaan (just returned from the Cape Verde Islands, so I had not reacted earlier)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-78731249622278591062009-03-25T23:32:00.000+01:002009-03-25T23:32:00.000+01:00FYI readersJules seems a bit frustrated that I deb...FYI readers<BR/><BR/>Jules seems a bit frustrated that I debunked the alarmist story of Shishmaref:<BR/>Storm frequency decreased since the seventies and the island even shows lateral growth.<BR/><BR/>vdlaan is not aware that four independent time series that have a spatial correlation of 70% can be used as excellent predictors for the inbetween area. I tried to explain several times, but it simply doesn't sink in.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-74082147127763910982009-03-25T01:24:00.000+01:002009-03-25T01:24:00.000+01:00FYI readers :Hans Erren seems a bit frustrated tha...FYI readers :<BR/><BR/>Hans Erren seems a bit frustrated that JvdLaan on Erren's blog patiently posed a lot of good questions. <BR/><BR/>Questions good enough to demonstrate Erren has a bad habit of answering nowhere near the question...juleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08149218335071592373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-41134376162590990882009-03-25T00:39:00.000+01:002009-03-25T00:39:00.000+01:00JvdLaan doesn't understand spatial correlation of ...JvdLaan doesn't understand spatial correlation of long timeseries. He thinks that looking at long reliable timeseries in Europe is cherrypicking. <BR/><BR/>The hot summer is ending for the alarmists, their voices are getting shrill.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1847816429050818607.post-69656642962520052382009-03-19T17:11:00.000+01:002009-03-19T17:11:00.000+01:00Zijn laatste posting, met die sprookjes is wel hee...Zijn laatste posting, met die sprookjes is wel heel erg. Het lijkt wel op een creationist. Voor ieder argument van Hans Labohm kun je wel een equivalent vinden bij het creationisme. Het ergste is dat het - weerlegd of niet - hij het straks weer op een andere plek gaat beweren.<BR/><BR/>Maar blijf doorgaan, Jules.<BR/><BR/>Ps Hans Erren is er ook zo een.<BR/><BR/>JvdLaanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com