JoNova
A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets To report "lost" comments or defamatory and offensive remarks, email the moderators at: support.jonova AT proton.me
Statistics
Commentator TdeF made some very interesting comments on CO2 readings on Monday July 21st open thread (from point 3) which caused me to revisit one of my own articles when I examined historic CO2 readings. Before referencing them, first we need to consider how CO2 is measured to give us the current 420ppm that causes some people such alarm.
CO2 readings in a modern scientific manner are typically done in dry air. New techniques have made it easier using spectroscopy and sensors which compensate for temperature and water vapour . Previously both these elements had to be laboriously “removed” from the atmospheric sample in order to obtain a reading as a dry mole fraction. See article link 1 /2013
https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/6/837/2013/
The highly involved processes used to obtain readings (link 2 /2021) are much more elaborate than the techniques used by scientists of the past.
https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/14/3087/2021/
Around 2010 I wrote an article on Historic measurements of CO2 as part of a wider series on temperatures and historic climate related baselines.
It is here;
https://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2010/03/06/historic-variations-in-co2-measurements/
Unfortunately over the years many links have ceased functioning, but there is still a considerable interesting historic narrative left . Many well regarded scientists from the 1800’s onwards took CO2 readings in a manner that are disregarded today. These generally recorded a substantially higher figure than is now usually considered as the 280ppm base line for the pre industrial era, as these were routinely up to 100ppm higher than that, with a significant proportion over 400ppm.
One of the scientists involved was Ernst Beck. He was a hero or villain depending on which side of the climate debate you stood on, examining chemical analysis and other analytical methods to record what he believed were real world measurements for their time-often the early 1800’s onwards. These were typically discounted by the modern science community as being an inaccurate method of measurement that were far too dependent on weather conditions and in particular plant growth, near the sites he examined . Readings in an actively growing crop being much higher than one taken in a barren landscape.
Ironically, some years ago I was meeting a sceptical colleague in Switzerland with the partial aim of obtaining historic temperature readings and to look at glacier records-a particular interest being Roman glacier levels. I had been in correspondence with Mr Beck on CO2 and had arranged to meet him en route to discuss the paper he had written, that is contained in the link below. The day before I was leaving I heard he had died.
Here is some of his very interesting work, there are links from the main article to the paper I was going to Europe to look at.
https://scienceofclimatechange.org/news-about-beck/
As mentioned, the chemical method Mr Beck primarily examined is frowned on, as were other methods used prior to around 1960 when the Keeling methodology (a fine scientist in his own right) became the norm and who started CO2 readings on the Keeling curve at around 315ppm. The pre industrial base of 280ppm became accepted and the familiar steadily increasing rise could be seen played out in graphic form.
Re-reading the various papers linked here, several questions come to mind;.
Were historic measurements of CO2 levels by many fine scientists over 150 years ago -which precipitated British govt legislation in factories from around 1860 to control CO2 levels- more accurate than believed? If so, this makes the pre industrial and 1960 baseline formulated by Keeling appear much too low. Is there greater variability, past and present, than the modern readings seem to indicate?
Whilst there has been an increase over recent times –for whatever reason- the 280ppm pre industrial figure seems doubtful and perhaps a figure around 350ppm should have been the Keeling base line. Also the logarithmic effect of CO2 –see work by Lindzen and Happer-seems to have been largely disregarded. The greatest effects of warming by CO2 is spent by 300ppm or lower. Readings appear to have already been notably higher than that since before the industrial years and any temperature increases attributed to it since, therefore seem exaggerated and would already have occurred.
As an aside, I bought several cheap CO2 sensors and was in communication with a couple of people here in Oz and in Europe and their readings on their similarly cheap sensors were broadly similar to mine, but bore no relationship to official figures as very often they were over 550ppm in Spring and a little lower in Winter with no plant growth. It depended on time of day and weather and wind and positioning, which were hardly scientific. Also, it was noticeable how you got bursts of more concentrated CO2 in a CO2 “dome”. Today at 3pm on a warm overcast July 21st outdoor readings were around 515ppm. A few minutes later when a shower arrived it escalated to 540ppm. Readings are always much higher indoors. One sensor was clearly wildly inaccurate and was replaced. The lowest reading I ever got was 474 but the vast majority were around 520 up to to 580ppm. What is the correct reading today for CO2 in the normal atmosphere that we all breathe, rather than one where humidity and temperature has been stripped out?
It should be simple to determine like temperature readings-but even these of course are far more open to question than was once thought.
370
Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics, by Gerhard Gerlich, points out that there is no proof of warming from laboratory experiments or experiments using an atmospheric chamber. Radiative forcing does not show up even in a laboratory experiment involving concentrated CO2. The fact is that ice core data shows that carbon dioxide levels follow the temperature by about 800 years, and that the Medieval Warm period peaked 800 years ago, which is why carbon dioxide levels are rising, while “Carbon cycle modelling and the residence time of natural and anthropogenic atmospheric CO2, (1997) by Tom Segalstad” shows that Henrys Law says that 98% of man-made CO2 emissions ended up in the Oceans.
The Radiative forcing ‘Hoax’ is also refuted by “Theory of Heat Radiation (Planck, 1914)” which implies that radiative heating does not occur for a gas. The reason is that the random nature of the movement or vibration of molecules means that half of the molecules moving towards the radiation are slowed down or cooled. So then radiative forcing is real, but only positive for half of the molecules. So in reality no heat is created in this process. Particles for Gas but a Microwave oven proves its waves for liquids. This is because unlike gases, liquids are paired in strong intermolecular bonds. The “Beer-Lambert law” for waves for liquids with strong intermolecular bonds, as proven by a microwave oven.
The real science started with James Clerk Maxwell and the lapse rate, as well as his use of the Poisson curve (Produced by the change of weight of the atmosphere above, with gravity getting less with altitude) which is mentioned in Chapter IV: Elementary Dynamic Principles: Measurement of Force. ‘Theory of Heat (1871)’ showing that warming is by molar mass not radiative forcing. But Maxwell only had data for the Earth, so the full answer came from the “Unified Theory of Climate (2011)” by Ned Nikolov & Karl Zeller. Venus with a quarter of a million times more carbon dioxide than the Earth provides the best answer to the problem. The temperature on Venus at the altitude that has identical pressure to that on the Earth’s surface is 1.176 times the Earth’s average surface temperature. The radiating temperature of Venus is 1.176 times that of the Earth, proving that input from the Sun and a change to thermal inertia due to pressure as a precise function of altitude are all that is needed to calculate the atmospheric greenhouse effect. The surface temperature of Venus, Earth, Mars, Europa, Titan and Triton follow these rules on atmospheric pressure and distance from the Sun. This overwhelming evidence against the carbon dioxide hoax is also confirmed by the fact that the average temperature up to the one bar pressure points on each of the planets, is the same, adjusted for distance from the Sun, despite the different main gases, Nitrogen for the Earth & Titan, Hydrogen for Jupiter, Neptune, Saturn & Uranus and Carbon Dioxide for Venus. Repeat, CARBON DIOXIDE for VENUS.
190
Someone on here posted a link to this and I grabbed a copy because as Tonyb has mentioned a lot of the links I kept tend to disappear Like the one that showed the experiment of the CO2 in a tall gas jar and temp actually decreased versus a vacuum.
I copied the full article but its a bit long for here so will pull out the pertinent points.
Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius (1859-1927) who made the assertion at the turn of the last century that the Earth was 30 deg warmer than could be expected because of ‘greenhouse’ gases
Not ten years later the calculation was criticised by the American physicist Professor R W Wood, often regarded as the father of infrared (IR) photography.
‘To test the matter I constructed two enclosures of dead black cardboard, one covered with a glass plate, the other with a plate of rock-salt of equal thickness. The bulb of a thermometer was inserted in each enclosure and the whole packed in cotton, with the exception of the transparent plates which were exposed. When exposed to sunlight the temperature rose gradually to 65°C, the enclosure covered with the salt plate keeping a little ahead of the other, owing to the fact that it transmitted the longer waves from the sun, which were stopped by the glass. In order to eliminate this action the sunlight was first passed through a glass plate.’
‘There was now scarcely a difference of one degree between the temperatures of the two enclosures. The maximum temperature reached was about 55°C. From what we know about the distribution of energy in the spectrum of the radiation emitted by a body at 55°C , it is clear that the rock-salt plate is capable of transmitting practically all of it, while the glass plate stops it entirely. This shows us that the loss of temperature of the ground by radiation is very small in comparison to the loss by convection, in other words that we gain very little from the circumstance that the radiation is trapped.’
For those that don’t know when we do infrared spectroscopy we use two rock salt plates with a tiny gap that we inject samples in to, one cell with air and the other cell with the sample. Why because the rock salt does not impede any of the wave lengths that pass through it, hence the use of rock salt in the experiment.
As an aside from the same article.
Apollo missions thermometers were left on the moon’s surface. The results were quietly published by NASA at the time – I suppose they thought that the moon’s surface temperatures were hardly headline news. But there was a mammoth surprise! The moon also showed a 30deg temperature excess above that expected which, by Arrhenius’s calculations
110
Scott
Great to see you. Good find. The whole subject is very interesting.i doubt that Keeling was correct in his assumptions on the 1958 base line and our knowledge of the logarithmic effect of CO2 has advanced in recent Years.
However it is depressing that my original article was 2010 and the one you linked to was 2013 .
I never did get round to part 2 of the sea rise article but came across a good book on the subject.
40
Last time I looked CO2 was highly soluble in water, especially COLD water. viz the beer and champagne in your refrigerator. (Assuming you can still afford the booze, the refrigerator and the electricity.
Once again I remind folk that one of the highly-touted atmospheric testing stations is above the tree-line on top of an active volcano, Mauna Loa, in Hawaii.
See also, the 6 or 7 ACTIVE volcanoes on the Antarctic continent, constantly emitting both CO2 AND CHLORINE, (and Radon, Xenon, etc).
Why did I mention the “tree-line”?
It is the marker of the limits above which “leafy” vegetation cannot grow, because of the rapidly diminishing CO2 in the atmosphere above that altitude. Of course, the “tree-line also varies with latitude.
CO2 is a “TRACE” gas, if you compare it to Nitrogen (79%).
Oxygen?
There was NO free oxygen in the atmosphere before, somehow, “proto-plants” in the oceans developed photosynthesis.
100
“Readings in an actively growing crop being much higher than one taken in a barren landscape.”
I’m confused with the statement. Was it Ernst Beck that reported this? Elsewhere, the claim is that an actively growing crop (corn?) could deplete the CO2 in still air.
70
Plants both breathe in and breathe out co2 depending on weather, their maturity and time of day
https://www.encyclopedie-environnement.org/en/life/plant-resistance-stress-role-respiration/
You may remember that around 5 years ago there was debate about whether the amazon forest was actually a net emitter of Co2 rather than a greedy drinker r of the stuff.
90
Tonyb,
If a plant GAINS mass, then it is a nett extractor of CO2 from the atmosphere. Sugars, starches, cellulose, etc are all made using CO2.
That should solve the question.
10
I think it was Freeman Dyson who said something like that.
JoNova wrote an article about the original paper!
https://joannenova.com.au/2013/09/plants-suck-half-the-co2-out-of-the-air-around-them-before-lunchtime-each-day/
80
Thanks.
20
My interest as well.
I would suspect this is related to time of day. My experience was in dissolved oxygen readings with the photosynthetic algae producing oxygen during the day and consuming it at night. That is why what are called ‘crashes’ tend to occur in aquaculture systems and fish ponds in the early morning.
There is the same time of day question about measuring the pH of a body of water with any concentration of plant or animal life.
10
TonyB,
Your first link on removal of water from the gas sample relates to measurements with instruments measuring light dimmed by passing through the gas.
Most of the early CO2 measurements quoted by Beck were before the time of this optical absorption. Typically, they were “wet chemistry” methods, often using the acidity produced when an air sample is dissolved in pure lab water. Prior removal of water in the sample was not an issue.
Mostly, the bulk of the measurements reported by Beck were discarded because they did not fit the present conventional wisdom. There is a very strong case to treat them scientifically, not socially.
These early wet chemists were not stupid. One can use their methods today and compare them to modern instrument results to confirm how good they are.
The big error at Mauna Loa today comes from daily rejection of results that “do not fit”. The ML people list these,such as the wind coming up slope from the wrong land direction.
I wrote an article about Mauna Loa CO2 error for WUWT 20 April 2022 “Sorry, But Hard Science is Not Done This Way”. Geoff S
110
In Australia, (according to the following video, not confirmed) apparently drivers over 60 are going to be subject to much more stringent driver’s license renewals such as medical tests and even doing driving tests.
I think 60 seems a bit young for this type of thing. These rules used to apply at a much older age, if at all, depending upon state.
Ageist I think.
https://youtu.be/xJ01QY9-RvQ
240
I can think of other segments of divers who more urgently and obviously deserve more stringent testing than the mature drivers among us.
260
Other candidates for much earlier “awareness” and reaction testing?
Pollie-muppets, Pubic Serpents, churnalists, Wankerdemics, for starters.
71
So can I. There is no test for reading our road signs in English language. Here in Melbourne, there is widespread reporting of corrupt issue of licences to new migrants esp. from Asia.
Geoff S
100
Years ago at a company Christmas Party an employee factory machine operator and migrant from an Asian country obviously had too much alcohol and was preparing to drive himself home. When questioned and advised not to drive and that he could fined and lose his licence if caught by police he said no problem, he had two driving licences, one in his English language name and the other his Asian name.
20
This looks like an AI site that only started posting videos two weeks ago….
That video was viewed over 50,000 times though.
It seems to be 70 -75 now, depending on State, dropping to 60 would seem a pretty extreme leap.
But, nothing can surprise these days.
150
I’ve noticed a few sites lately in you tube that seem to go further than being content creators using AI, but just seem to be 100% AI sites, the whole thing is AI with zero human intervention. They even seem to put stuff up for you that matches your interests from your viewing habits. (We got one that tried to fake a German historical bus that never existed).
100
As one who has been undergoing age related driving medical since 75 to retain my HC and MC se tests are understandable, but like you I think maybe 60 is a bit early..
110
Revenue raiser Murray….sure to have a cost to do the “test” or multiple costs ??
00
An absolute scam for the medico-pharma industry! Most people see a doctor enough times to have the ‘medical history’ needed to pass the current test, and any competent doctor would see that you are getting too dodgy to drive. The page-full of blood tests they made me take (no medical history) would have cost hundreds of dollars commercially, if not more. The physical check on my necessary second doctor’s visit would have passed anyone who could walk, so I don’t see what they are going to ‘improve’. I’ll find out if the second compulsory certificate needs it all again later this year.
Medicine is just chemistry these days, and we don’t seem any better for it.
120
Varies quite a bit between States. Insurance companies start to get wary once you pass 70. You see it in travel insurance and rental car agreements.
In VIC once you hit 75 you can no longer get a 10 year licence renewal, and must renew it every 3 years. Supposed to make you think about it more often they say. Nothing else is mandated.
50
Yarpos,
Years ago I stopped all my insurance except “compulsory” types, which for me are third party car and our block of 14 units. For the latter, the premiums over our 20 years of occupancy have risen faster than ABS statistics for inflation, cost of living. We have to pay some $3,800 a year to cover our group insurance. That is about $75,000 so far in today’s dollars, up against the wall. We could opt to insure our own unit as well, but why? We get nothing back. We could buy a near new luxury car for that. What a mandated rip-off, keeping insurance company people in the luxury they have come to expect! Geoff S
60
Then factor in those who speed, drink-drive, drug-drive, tailgate, sit in the overtaking lane (too often relatively stationary alongside a car in the left lane) and only get into the left lane to take an offramp (“Mr. Important” can’t be held up by mere mortals), those who look at the passenger to talk to them etc etc.
I just sold my REX, not because I’m too old but because it’s not worth the constant dread that some incompetent clown will crash into it.
As the old joke goes “I’d overtake the P-platers but I’ve never been able to catch up with them”.
Oldies can be slow and nervous but as per the above, way more don’t know the basics and don’t care.
90
John,
In my mid-80s driving daily I prefer the right lane above others because it gives more open room nearby, to dodge into when other cars go ape. I very seldom exceed posted speed limits and I like to leave a clear space between my car and the car ahead, to avoid nose to tail dings.
It is almost universal here in Victoria that this driving pattern upsets most others. Few drivers obey 80 signs in suburbia, so those who do quickly get hostility from others. Tradies in big utes are notable for instant rage. That space ahead gets rapidly filled by those who are so ignorant and inexperienced that they believe lane swapping is a sport to get there faster. Reality says you will move at the average speed of the slug of traffic around you for typical Melbourne traffic density. Lane changing might get you home a few seconds earlier but there are no big advantages.
I do not know how to improve overall driving standards. With a rare 70 years of experience and observation, I’d choose lack of driver education and lack of enforcement of road rules as the biggest current problems.
20
“I do not know how to improve overall driving standards.”
It is child’s play to pop you into a simulator and have you drive in all sorts of situations for 20minutes. Just as simple to have all the roads in the simulator correct for the city you live in, and traffic can be added or subtracted every time you do it. Near-misses, kids running onto the road, kangaroos, trucks tailgating you.. they can all be put in there and your reactions and general skill tested.
The Govt could sell the programme to 16-yr-olds to practice on before they went for their L’s, and they could put them in the local libraries. It would be competitive if it just loaded you with more and more difficult roads and piled in the information overload, how long can you last without a crash.
Anyone who plays a modern computer game will realise this, they are very realistic and fully immersive.
10
This won’t be about road safety. I have no doubt that it will result in extra fees, charges and government revenue.
10
Here is a video using quotes from Ludwig Leichhardt’s diaries about Aboriginal tribal warfare as he observed it in Australia in the 1850’s.
Video:
https://youtu.be/6M0KtqPDrkc
Diaries:
https://www.museum.qld.gov.au/collections-and-research/memoirs/culture-7
Battles:
https://cdarmangeat.ghes.univ-paris-diderot.fr/australia/index.php
Also see:
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/5005
Journal of an Overland Expedition in Australia by Ludwig Leichhardt
110
You can’t trust your lying eyes because your brain plays tricks on you.
https://youtube.com/shorts/tFR5BCA86fM?si=MbC7dbhkiBZv5vqs
90
That ball-point pen is a witch! Burn it!
(apologies to The Life Of Brian).
60
AI is not only being used by many lazy school children to do their homework, it’s being used by many university students, and professionals including programmers who get it to write code, medical doctors that get it to write case notes and help with diagnoses and lawyers who get it to help on cases.
Now, AI might be very smart but it’s certainly not infallible and as they used to teach, back in the day, it’s still governed by the principle of Garbage In, Garbage Out.
None of the above people will necessarily detect errors, nor will they necessarily understand the answers given or conclusions drawn.
Apart from the fact that people today are already extremely dumbed-down and lack historical, scientific, mathematical etc. skills or general knowledge due to the Left’s takeover of the education system (now an indoctrination system), the dumbing-down caused by AI could be the final coup de grâce of our Civilisation.
AI can be a powerful tool for checking things but it should be used wisely and you should already have a good understanding of the topic you are asking about. And always remember, it does not necessarily give the correct answer.
280
Also, some people are forming “relationships” with AI chat bots.
Don’t.
Reserve that for humans.
170
David,
I’ve changed from calling it AI tp AB.
Artificial Bullsh*t.
You still need to check if what it says is correct.
Just like when politicians talk; although sometimes here
you can catch glimpses of the yellow stuff dribbling
out of the corners of their mouth.
90
It’s no different to relying on GPS to find your way around, if you depend totally on it, you can end up in all sorts of trouble, as evidenced by people driving into lakes or turning onto railway tracks.
160
Yesterday I posed the this question from my daughter’s year 9 science textbook:
No-one answered correctly. A few answered with a different explanation but were unable to say whether their hypothesis was consistent with a warming troposphere and cooling stratosphere. For reference, this is the observed temperature trend: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/106/5/full-BAMS-D-24-0212.1-f2.jpg
It’s a shame our elder population do not have the comprehension or critical thinking skills expected of today’s 14-year-old science students.
135
That’s a very silly and absurdly complex leading question and simply indoctrination of 14 year olds, not science let alone settled science.
Who decided there are only two answers possible and what they were and that it was proof of ‘Global Climate Change’ and what exactly was global climate change and why the troposphere boundary had anything to do with it?
420
The question is no different to others in the text, it indicates that standard that 14-year-olds are expected to be at. Why are you unable to answer the question? Do you have insufficient background knowledge?
120
“The question is no different to others in the text”. Then they are all leading questions, not teaching but coaching in the approved response. Indoctrination.
310
The question was answered, but its propaganda based you just didnt like the answer because it was “correct” aka compliant with the propaganda
120
Simon, does your daughter attend a public or private school, public schools seem to push the global warming narrative.
60
The answer is (C). A reduction in cloud albedo would cause the troposphere to get warmer, and the boundary between the troposphere and the stratosphere to move upward because the troposphere is expanding due to the warmth. But the stratosphere is not getting warmer because the stratosphere is above the clouds, and (A) the Sun did not heat up the stratosphere , and (B) Carbon Dioxide did not heat up the stratosphere.
60
Oh, and by the way Simon, what you meant to say was that no one provided the pre-determined answer that was part of a loaded question. As I have previously stated, this is a blatant example of teaching 14 year olds what to think and not how to think. If you consider that such badly framed either / or question for such a complex problem leads to critical thinking you are completely delusional.
341
Anyone would know that the questioner wants the ‘approved’ answer that has been taught in the brainwashing curriculum.
That doesn’t involve any critical thinking, just blind acceptance and repeating stuff like a parrot.
Not so much a slam dunk as a face palm Simon.
220
“It’s a shame our elder population do not have the comprehension or critical thinking skills expected of today’s 14-year-old science students.”
On the other hand, the elder population has gained the ability, via the the process of natural selection, to provide an accurate assessment of the critical thinking skills of 14 year olds.
150
Or even – how old are you, Simon?
Auto
50
He has a 14 year old daughter, though she could be his wifes from a previous.
30
How about (C), other.
60
I answered correctly. Neither(A) nor (B) is correct because the question is unscientific nonsense.
As soon as “greenhouse gasses” are mentioned you know it is unscientific claptrap.
No where over oceans emits at temperature higher than freezing. The average emission temperature is 255K; 18K below freezing. That means the majority of OLR emissions are coming off ice. Nothing to do with gasses.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/07/17/toward-a-deterministic-model-of-cloud-development-over-ocean-warm-pools/
The reducing stratosphere temperature aligns with increasing ozone, which is the dominating radiating component of the stratosphere.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332591878/figure/fig4/AS:750900175986693@1556039961484/Global-total-ozone-changes-Satellite-observations-show-depletion-of-global-total-ozone.png
What is really sad is that the Australian education system is producing reguritators – not critical thinkers. And you are an example of that system Simon. Either you have a vested interest in pushing the scam or you have no ability to think for yourself.
The Climate Scam™ is losing its funding through Trump and the work of DOGE. The scam is crumbling in the UK and will die once Farage becomes PM. US government will not attend COP30 so free money has departed that arena. Sovereign risk is now a clear threat in Australia for “renewables”. The sovereign risk is now so high in Australia that financiers want feasibility to be paid for by governments.
172
Your A or B choices are meaningless.
It’s like asking “which is the true god, A or B?” when there are countless alternatives but your personal beliefs and bias constrain you to the preconceived narrative.
And just like such a god question, you lack evidence to prove your own claims.
Goading troll nonsense.
0/10
70
The question assumes there is global climate change (presumably abnormal) . If you dont agree with the assumption, it cant be answered!
80
The problem is that a reduction in cloud albedo would cause the troposphere to get warmer, and the boundary between the troposphere and the stratosphere to move upward because the troposphere is expanding due to the warmth. But the stratosphere is not getting warmer because the stratosphere is above the clouds.
So neither A or B give reasons for the answer. You would need (C) A reduction in low cloud albedo.
(C) The real cause of Climate Change. The ‘20 GeV plus’ high-energy cosmic ray information that proves that the sun was the primary cause for climate change. Showing that between 1913 and 1996, only one of eight Solar Cycles was longer than the mean Solar Cycle length of 11.04 years, the last of these was the shortest Solar Cycle for more than 200 years, the strength of the Suns magnetic field more than doubled, the cosmic ray flux fell by 11 percent and there was a 8.6 percent reduction in clouds. During the last 100 years high-energy cosmic rays became scarcer because unusually vigorous action by the Sun batted away Galactic Cosmic Rays. Fewer Galactic cosmic rays meant fewer clouds, and a warmer world. These correlation’s are caused by the speed of the centre of the Sun relative to the centre of mass or barycentre of the Solar System, which determines the length of the Hale Magnetic Solar Cycle.
20
I found this paper which you can skim read, the upshot is that a warm troposphere and cool stratosphere is a natural function on this planet.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2319228121
They don’t mention CO2.
21
Yesterday, I pointed out the grammatical error in the question and you failed to fix it.
As TonyB points out at the top of today, whether it is a single measurement or multiple measurements is important.
It’s a shame Science students aren’t taught to question ‘what was measured’ and ‘how was it measured’.
Science becomes about the status and position gained by holding particular beliefs. Junk.
00
“No-one answered correctly”.
How do you know? The Answer is that noone knows what is causing Climate Change.
What I do know IMHO is that it isn’t caused by CO2.
Whoops. This should be a response to number 6 above.
160
FWIW
“Simon Says”
“1910 Fruitgum Company – Simon says (1968) – YouTube”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKZ1ey-HBqg
00
1. Satellites do not measure temperature. They measure atmospheric brightness and then use computer programmes to provide temperature ESTIMATES
2. Satellites from different eras have different instruments and, as NASA say, trying to get a consistent and coherent temperature record is like trying to complete a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle with no guide picture.
3. According to NASA, satellites do not provide accurate temperature measurements. At best they provide estimated trends.
4. NASA admit this and, as has been seen with past “adjustments” , these estimates are open to manipulation. Computers are only as good as the programme they are running.
5. Average global temperatures in 1883, once adjusted for Krakatoa were 14.3 c. Average global temperatures in 1908 were 14.4 c according to von Hann and confirmed by modern zonal meridional analysis.
6. Ceres satellite data confirms an increase in out going long wave radiation between 2000 and 2020. But the IPCC manipulated the real data because it totally destroyed the greenhouse gas theory.
7. A measured increase in outgoing long wave radiation means your cooling stratosphere claim in bollocks and relies on manipulated data.
8. For 1991 to 2018 HadCRUT4, Berkeley and NASA put the average global temperature at 14.5 c, so no warming for 100 years, in direct contradiction to the rubbish chart you referenced.
9. Even the global warming alarmists can’t agree with each other. A patent case of garbage in – garbage out.
150
But isn’t it – in some circles, at least – Garbage in, Grants [and pensions, and conferences] out?
Or is my cynical hat a bit too tight?
Auto
130
And, if DJ Trump [and pals] is not sufficient to stop the nonsense, then are we likely to [largely] lose our culture and civilisation before rational people regain control?
Certainly, my opinion is that – here, in the UK – the Macropodid Mr Miliband is not now rational [and might never have been ..].
What I have seen suggest that Australia [and Germany, much of Canada, and elsewhere] appears to be in the same leaky boat.
We have Miliband, you have Bowen.
Are we – and our children and their offspring – condemned to a return to the Eighteenth Century – before steam engines, or any other use of concentrated energy?
Disregard electricity – it will be [ahem] unreliable, if you get it at all …
Auto
100
If POTUS had done nothing else than to say CO2 does not cause global warming, he would have been lauded.
Australia, Canada and UK are virtue signalling, going from nowhere to oblivion, so eventually they’ll have to walk away with red faces.
11
Adrian, Thermometers don’t measure temperature either. They measure the height up a tube of an expanding liquid. The height is an estimate of temperature. Most measurements, unless you are simply counting discrete objects, are estimates.
29
So all this is based on estimates?
70
Anything that carries an error or uncertainty is an estimate. So yes. This is science 101. Complaining about something “just being an estimate”, is either scientific illiteracy or an attempt at a straw man.
08
Scientists acknowledge this uncertainty. They use statistical methods and multiple measurements to find a range in which the true value probably lies. My hot wire anemometer for instance has a calibration factor of – 0.03 m/s at 0.5 m/s. In real terms there will be a plus or minus in that 0.03, but with an instrument that measures to 2 decimal places, it is accurate enough. However, when they are dealing with satellite temperature measurements, the error range is far wider. Dealing with multiple different instruments that do not correlate, over a number of years, no direct measurement of the actual temperature, only brightness, and different computer algorithms that give different results, satellite temperature measurements are not even an estimate. They don’t even really qualify as a best guess. NASA themselves say that ground bases temperature measurements are way more accurate.
30
Yes we all get that. Well, except that pedantic pratt GA, who obviously thinks he is better than the rest of us. But there is nothing to brag about when it comes to being a bigger, better t*sser.
31
“Scientists acknowledge this uncertainty.”
They do?
Where?
When?
Oh, you mean amongst themselves.
I hear there’s lots of food throwing and hair pulling, and the occasional reference to maternal sexual activity.
20
Yep. Well noted Bronco.
Apologies to brat for outing him.
00
Typical delusional pillock. You have no idea who I am and your hubris is only exceeded by your arrogance. Go back to sniffing solvents.
02
Yes, Science 101 is ‘settled’ … on estimates.
Science 301 is when things get a bit unsettled after you learn the method of estimation.
It’s like the military, you can’t tell the new guys what actually happens or they’ll run away.
I’m not sure when you learn to estimate sarcasm.
20
You been at the acetone again GA?
80
For once the ‘modelling’ got it right – yet it had nought to do with ‘runaway warming’:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-21/snow-falls-on-bluff-knoll-in-sterling-range-national-park-wa/105548230
Admittedly it looks more like sleet or hail in the photos – but wait – there’s MORE snow predicted for Wed/Thur when yet ANOTHER wet chilly southerly front blasts the southwest of Western Australia.
Maybe Climate Change has caught a Cold?
110
I have told them a million times…..do not exaggerate !!
70
The ABC can’t even get the location name correct – it’s the STIRLING Range.
80
Have climbed it once, carrying my small child on my back. In my younger years. Not a place where I would go in winter though.
40
Snow in WA, whoda thunk it.
50
Actually at one time, I think it was around 2004, a significant part of the WA southern area was covered in snow. It has snowed in Perth’s foothills at least once in recorded history.
80
And in 1956 it snowed as far north as Geraldton, 800 kms north of Bluff Knoll. Snow was last recorded in the Perth hills in 1968.
50
We could do with a bit of globull warming in WA right now. it’s a bit chilly even in the north of the state.
40
FWIW
“As German / EU / UK / USA Hubris Lobbies For War… Russia Says?”
https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2025/07/21/as-german-eu-uk-usa-hubris-lobbies-for-war-russia-says/
10
I can see the woke German saying but you are talking about the old right wing Germany. They were different germans to today’s socialists!
I expect the US military will look for savings by reducing presence in Europe. Meanwhile Germany is losing its industry as UK has. The median age in Germany is now 47. They would have little prospect of putting troops on the ground or building a war machine. So German hubris and doubtful support from US despite NATO.
30
This may sound familiar to anyone reading our Govt handouts appearing as ‘news’ in the mainstream press-
“(Govt) has identified strategic areas of growth in its rolling five-year national economic plans and handed out massive financial subsidies to those sectors to stimulate investment.”
Its actually from an SMH article talking of China’s economic slowdown and how it was bought about by Govt throwing cash around and picking winners…who turned out to be losers! ie- doing what every Govt does these days!
Just like our State Govts climbing on the handout bandwagon-
“Local governments, anxious to get their share of investment and jobs, then offer their own incentives and help fuel a rush by companies to do what Beijing has encouraged them to do, leading to overinvestment and overcapacity.”
..and then in the famous Govt procedure of doubling-down on a bad bet..
“Beijing tried to stimulate domestic consumption with incentives for trade-ins of autos and household appliances and other goods.”
But with a trade surplus of $900billion a MONTH, I suppose we are doomed to follow their playbook in the hope Govt throwing money around will do the same for us.
50
It was an investment in the capitalist system and they believed they could avoid the pitfalls of boom and bust. Everyone and their dog were over leveraged in the property market and values have been steadily falling since Evergrande.
By the time Beijing got around to encouraging local consumption it was too late, on the ground its an economic disaster with mass unemployment and nobody has any money. It is truly a great depression.
By comparison the US and Russia are heading towards stagflation.
02
The first two comments by Tony and Paul take us to the truth that the CO2 drama is not real.
https://www.joannenova.com.au/2025/07/tuesday-118/#comment-2860477
From a basic thermodynamic point of view the dramatists have essentially implied that CO2 can magically pump out “energy” that simple logic says it could never acquire.
The Global Warming theory is scientifically baseless.
50
My Albanese partially funded battery has been running for eight days. Last night was the first night it started with 80% charge and has carried us through the night and morning. The best previous day was 60% charge and that is not enough to supply the house overnight until the sun hits the next day..
So at present we are not getting enough excess from our 3kW of solar panels to fully charge the battery. That will change over coming weeks as the sun gets higher and duration increases.
Albenese’s first $75 of the $300 rebate lobbed in the electricity account this week, which is still in surplus. We are in good shape to go another year without an electricity bill despite losing the 66c/kWh feed in tariff in December. But I did have to invest in a battery..
There are many Australian households not paying anything for electricity. And most people and businesses who own a roof can do the same. Surely that is a threat to any business model aimed at supplying grid power. Who would invest in grid scale “renewables” in these circumstances?
So here I am leaning on the grid to keep the house powered for part of the time but I am not paying for that because I get a government gift that covers that cost.
This last week, we did not export any power because the battery soaked up all daytime excess. I doubt we will regularly export again till September and then it will be in late afternoon rather than middle of the day. Accordingly, the uptake of household batteries should be evident in reducing the duck curve. That could be good for the economics of coal fired generators.
I have seen better deals on batteries since ours was installed and even Amazon are selling just 12V batteries for under $200/kWh. Bunnings also have solar panels and batteries on display. So the battery rebate has currently made the market more competitive than adding to cost. This could be partially due to the Trump tariffs hitting China.
I would expect that most roof owners would get 3 to 4 year payback on household solar with battery now. There are not many investments better than that. The Federal Government is not going to get its “renewables” target by finding investors to build high risk wind and solar farms. But they will find home owners willing to install solar panels and batteries; particularly if the government contributes to improve the return.
If Australia wants data centres then the best place is in the Latrobe Valley powered from new lignite plants. With good engineering and committed construction team, you would get the lowest cost power in the world in the Latrobe Valley.
60
Rick, did you pick up on the VoltX (NeoVolt), 30 kWh + inverter , installed, offer for $5920 under the new Gov rebate scheme ?
https://voltxenergy.com.au/pages/australian-federal-home-battery-rebate-offer
10
Make certain they Arte offering LIFePO4 cells. I would also be wary of soft case cells.
The offer has some riders but they are not exceptional. If you are installing a 30jkWh battery it will inevitably require a breaker and that could mean changes to the supply breaker as well so they need to have that as an exception. But that would be the same for any 30kWh battery.
Prtudent households could go off grid with a 30kWh battery and 10kW of winter optimised panels. You would probably invest in the smallest available auto start diesel as well.
If they are offering LiFePO4 cells in a 30kWh battery for that price with no significant strings then it is a very good deal. If I was going off-grid it would be my choice.
I chased a number of battery installers and went with the one that resp[onded to my email. That was before the Albanese rebate. The supplier offered the rebate if I was prepared to wait till July to power up. So far it is looking better than $2/d saving because even if the battery does not hold up till the next day, it is getting through the peak demand time and there are times through the day when clouds pass over and the battery does its thing. There is a tiny amount of control hysteresis because the meter does not always show zero through the day when the solar input and loads are changing. The actual demand,and can swing up and down by 40Wh in a 30 minute time interval.
After a couple of weeks operation I will publish some demand data. The best ones at present are no demand but in a couple of weeks, I experct to see the occasional surplus again.
I would not get any benefit from a bigger battery now because I am solar constrained. I will wait till next year to see if there is any saving potential for additional solar.
20
The topic of western Canada separating from eastern Canada could lead to a state-by-state referendum next year. The big issue there is that these States trade with the USA for income and then send the surplus east to support the eastern States. Trump has clearly indicated he would gladly accept those states into the USA because they are resource rich.
In Australia, the government is clearly working to strengthen ties with China. Australia is highly dependent on China and Australians have benefitted hugely from China’s emergence. So if there was a question for an Australian referendum on Australia becoming a Chinese satellite or a US satellite, which way would it go?
51
“So if there was a question for an Australian referendum on Australia becoming a Chinese satellite or a US satellite, which way would it go?”
Make sure “None of the above” is included as an option!
30
I’m old enough to remember when Australia was “highly dependent” on Japan trade and tourism.
We have been reduced to being just another mine, unable to manufacture. If China isn’t top dog someone else will be but Asia, where we have the advantage, isn’t going anywhere.
40
JC2 bookmark #2
Jason Hanson, ex-CIA, covers self defense, security, survival, tech tips and life-saving strategies for all.
https://m.youtube.com/c/JasonHansonSpyBriefing
A wealth of useful information.
00
Are you (or someone you care for) old, permanently baffled and need to be put in a home? Well maybe not.
https://x.com/BarbaraOneillAU/status/1946366632957235592
30
It’s almost weekly that someone tells us what causes Alzheimers. They can’t all be right.
How many couples, married for decades, eating a similar diet, BOTH get Az? None I know of.
If I had to suggest the most likely in my mind I would say SUNLIGHT, and not just Vit D. More likely the lower, infra-red band. Employment and sports are the BIG differences within married couples.
10
And genetics H. Generally “partners” are not related therefore different genes. All else being equal re diet, exercise lifestyle etc.
10
Retro music Tuesday: Weezer’s Buddy Holly, 1994
https://youtu.be/kemivUKb4f4?si=GaNd8qfMkvogiils
10
FWIW
“Grave Nation: Ukrainian Cemetery Mega-Project Reveals Dimming Military Hopes”
https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/grave-nation-ukrainian-cemetery-mega
10
“He concludes by stating that the right question is no longer whether Ukraine has lost—which is rhetorical at this point—but how far Ukraine will lose: ”
Finally, the West are willing to talk about it! Everyone else has known for two years now.
“the Ukrainian deputies who still have some brain left understand that with the current state of affairs in Ukraine, the country will soon cease to exist.”
Russians have been calling it ‘404’ for years now, they knew it would not exist in the future. NATO will destroy Ukraine completely, then look for the next patsy to push into a war with Russia. Look at Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Libya after the Yanks went through them, war destroys a country for generations.
30
https://pisa-framework.oecd.org/science-2025/
Environmental science competencies
Demonstrate respect for diverse perspectives, and hope, in seeking solutions to socio-ecological crises
A student who demonstrates this competency can:
Evaluate actions drawing on an ethic of care for each other and all species based on a worldview where humans are part of the environment rather than separate from it (being ecocentric)
Acknowledge the many ways societies have created injustices and work to empower all people to contribute to community and ecosystem well-being
Exhibit resilience, hope, and efficacy, individually and collectively, in responding to socio-ecological crises
Respect diverse perspectives on issues and look for solutions to regenerate impacted communities and ecosystems
This competency contains elements that are measured by the concept of Science Identity, including epistemic beliefs; dispositions of care and concern towards other people, other species, and the planet; and feelings of efficacy and agency in addressing socio-ecological crises. This competency requires content, procedural, and epistemic knowledge.
Agency in the Anthropocene requires understanding that human impacts have already significantly altered Earth’s systems, and they continue to do so. It refers to ways of being and acting within the world that position people as part of (rather than separate from) ecosystems, acknowledging and respecting all species and the interdependence of life.
Young people with Anthropocene Agency:
Believe that their actions will be appreciated, approved, and effective as they work to mitigate climate change, biodiversity loss, water scarcity, and other complex issues and crises
Acknowledge the many ways societies may have created injustices and work to empower all people to contribute to community and ecosystem well-being
Demonstrate hope, resilience, and efficacy in the face of crises that are both social and ecological
Respect and evaluate multiple perspectives and diverse knowledge systems
Engage with other young people and adults, across the generations, in civic processes that lead to improved community well-being and sustainable futures
Work individually and with others across a range of scales, from local to global, to understand and address complex challenges that face all beings in our communities
20
..another dead-end road for young people to embark upon. “I know! Lets do a political science or woman’s gender studies degree instead of engineering or physics.”
” dispositions of care and concern towards..the planet ” The planet will not thank you I’m afraid, it will still kill you if you’re stupid!
30
FWIW
“Trump Appointee Finds $50 Billion in Pentagon Waste, Then Resigns: ‘Mission Accomplished’ ”
“In Washington’s ecosystem of perpetual bureaucrats and career climbers, there exists a rare species: the public servant who actually treats government service like military deployment. Show up, complete the mission, pack up, and head home. It’s a foreign concept in a city where proximity to power becomes its own addiction.”
More at
https://istandforfreedom.com/trump-appointee-finds-resigns/
Canberra examples for instance?
70
And
“It’s time to tilt at some windmills”
https://tomknighton.substack.com/p/its-time-to-tilt-at-some-windmills
Via https://instapundit.com/733532/#disqus_thread
00
FWIW
“Government employees: The most spoiled and privileged individuals on Earth”
https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/essays-and-commentaries/government-employees-the-most-spoiled-and-privileged-individuals-on-earth/
10
FWIW
“Winning the Small Fights: Trump Liberates America from Soggy Straws”
https://pjmedia.com/david-manney/2025/07/21/winning-the-small-fights-trump-liberates-america-from-soggy-straws-n4941969
20
My cynical nature found this meme posting”useful”.
Politician to AGW scientist:
So 97% of you scientists think the science is “settled”?
Answer: Of course
Politician: Great if is settled we do not need to fund anymore projects
60
Horrors – an algal bloom – caused [of course] by climate change …
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y7nze38p5o
“Australia’s toxic algae bloom is ‘natural disaster’ – premier”
22 July 2025 – Simon Atkinson and Tiffanie Turnbull, BBC News, Sydney
“The algal bloom – a rapid increase in the population of algae in water systems – has been spreading since March and is now twice the size of the country’s capital territory.”
Canberra is about 315 square miles, so this is a monster 630+ square miles
London is about 670 square miles …
“Algal bloom is naturally occurring but is caused by ocean warming, marine heatwaves, and nutrient pollution – all a direct result of climate change.”
So, there you go – not only pink goats …
I’m sure it is bad for those who make [or made] their living from the sea, but things do change in nature.
And humans will need to adjust and adapt.
Auto
20