archive-org.com » ORG » C » CLIMATEAUDIT.ORG

Total: 491

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • High-Resolution Ocean Sediments « Climate Audit
    p 898 von Rad et al 1999 A 5000 yr Record of Climate Change in Varved Sediments from the Oxygen Minimum Zone off Pakistan Northeastern Arabian Sea Quaternary Research 51 39 53 1999 SO 90 56 KA from box core SO 90 39KG taken from the center of the OMZ west of Karachi 24 50N 65 55E water depth 695 m sedimentation rate 1 2 1 5 mm year Annual resolution by varve counting Arctic Ocean Southern Ocean and Antarctica Khim et al 2002 Unstable Climate Oscillations during the Late Holocene in the Eastern Bransfield Basin Antarctic Peninsula Quaternary Research 58 234 245 2002 http www climateaudit org p 105 Core A9 EB2 Sedimentation rate 87 cm 1000 yr Magnetics scanned at 1 cm intervals Resolution 12 years Like this Like Loading 3 Comments ann lillie Posted Dec 14 2009 at 3 39 PM Permalink Reply Firstly may I thank you for all your considerable efforts in the cause of scientific truth i can t properly express my gratitude to you as it is so enormous And if you could please help me find information about the latest scare brought up by the AGW bunch namely the acidification of the oceans I would be most grateful Ann Lillie 14 12 09 Visitor Posted May 2 2010 at 3 21 AM Permalink Reply The link to the Pacific Peru sediment at uni mainz de is broken and they do not seem to have any obvious way to get the data now Was this part of their ELSA project Does anyone know of where to get that sediment data file steve I saved the data and will email it if you contact me BUt you should contact the authors and ask them to restore the information Matt Erickson Posted Oct 21 2010 at 11 20 PM Permalink Reply Why are sedimentation rates of interest Post a Comment Click here to cancel reply Required fields are marked Name Email Website Comment Notify me of new comments via email Notify me of new posts via email Tip Jar The Tip Jar is working again via a temporary location Pages About Blog Rules and Road Map CA Assistant CA blog setup Contact Steve Mc Econometric References FAQ 2005 Gridded Data High Resolution Ocean Sediments Hockey Stick Studies Proxy Data Station Data Statistics and R Subscribe to CA Tip Jar Categories Categories Select Category AIT Archiving Nature Science climategate cg2 Data Disclosure and Diligence Peer Review FOIA General Holocene Optimum Hurricane Inquiries Muir Russell IPCC ar5 MBH98 Replication Source Code Spot the Hockey Stick Modeling Hansen Santer UK Met Office Multiproxy Studies Briffa Crowley D Arrigo 2006 Esper et al 2002 Hansen Hegerl 2006 Jones Mann 2003 Jones et al 1998 Juckes et al 2006 Kaufman 2009 Loehle 2007 Loehle 2008 Mann et al 2007 Mann et al 2008 Mann et al 2009 Marcott 2013 Moberg 2005 pages2k Trouet 2009 Wahl and Ammann News and Commentary MM Proxies Almagre Antarctica bristlecones Divergence Geological Ice core Jacoby

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/high-resolution-ocean-sediments/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Subscribe to CA « Climate Audit
    Nature Blogs RealClimate Roger Pielke Jr Roger Pielke Sr Roman M Science of Doom Tamino Warwick Hughes Watts Up With That William Connolley WordPress com World Climate Report Favorite posts Bring the Proxies up to date Due Diligence FAQ 2005 McKitrick What is the Hockey Stick debate about Overview Responses to MBH Some thoughts on Disclosure Wegman and North Reports for Newbies Links Acronyms Latex Symbols MBH 98 Steve s Public Data Archive WDCP Wegman Reply to Stupak Wegman Report Weblogs and resources Ross McKitrick Surface Stations Archives Archives Select Month February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/subscribe-to-ca/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Econometric References « Climate Audit
    econ yale edu P cp p09b p0966 pdf Yule G U 1926 Why do we sometimes get nonsense correlations between Time Series JRSS 89 1 63 http climateaudit files wordpress com 2008 02 yule 1926 jrss pdf Like this Like Loading Tip Jar The Tip Jar is working again via a temporary location Pages About Blog Rules and Road Map CA Assistant CA blog setup Contact Steve Mc Econometric References FAQ 2005 Gridded Data High Resolution Ocean Sediments Hockey Stick Studies Proxy Data Station Data Statistics and R Subscribe to CA Tip Jar Categories Categories Select Category AIT Archiving Nature Science climategate cg2 Data Disclosure and Diligence Peer Review FOIA General Holocene Optimum Hurricane Inquiries Muir Russell IPCC ar5 MBH98 Replication Source Code Spot the Hockey Stick Modeling Hansen Santer UK Met Office Multiproxy Studies Briffa Crowley D Arrigo 2006 Esper et al 2002 Hansen Hegerl 2006 Jones Mann 2003 Jones et al 1998 Juckes et al 2006 Kaufman 2009 Loehle 2007 Loehle 2008 Mann et al 2007 Mann et al 2008 Mann et al 2009 Marcott 2013 Moberg 2005 pages2k Trouet 2009 Wahl and Ammann News and Commentary MM Proxies Almagre Antarctica bristlecones Divergence Geological Ice core Jacoby Mann PC1 Medieval Noamer Treeline Ocean sediment Post 1980 Proxies Solar Speleothem Thompson Yamal and Urals Reports Barton Committee NAS Panel Satellite and gridcell Scripts Sea Ice Sea Level Rise Statistics Multivariate RegEM Spurious Steig at al 2009 Surface Record CRU GISTEMP GISTEMP Replication Jones et al 1990 SST Steig at al 2009 UHI TGGWS Uncategorized Unthreaded Articles CCSP Workshop Nov05 McIntyre McKitrick 2003 MM05 GRL MM05 EE NAS Panel Reply to Huybers Reply to von Storch Blogroll Accuweather Blogs Andrew Revkin Anthony Watts Bishop Hill Bob Tisdale Dan Hughes David Stockwell Icecap Idsos James Annan Jeff Id Josh Halpern Judith Curry Keith Kloor Klimazweibel Lubos Motl Lucia s Blackboard Matt Briggs NASA GISS Nature Blogs RealClimate Roger Pielke Jr Roger Pielke Sr Roman M Science of Doom Tamino Warwick Hughes Watts Up With That William Connolley WordPress com World Climate Report Favorite posts Bring the Proxies up to date Due Diligence FAQ 2005 McKitrick What is the Hockey Stick debate about Overview Responses to MBH Some thoughts on Disclosure Wegman and North Reports for Newbies Links Acronyms Latex Symbols MBH 98 Steve s Public Data Archive WDCP Wegman Reply to Stupak Wegman Report Weblogs and resources Ross McKitrick Surface Stations Archives Archives Select Month February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/econometric-references/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Blog Rules and Road Map « Climate Audit
    always finish up as above This week I tried to access it at 6 a m UK time at which I guess volume from Europe and USA would be minimal I could not get access I last downloaded HADCRUT3 on 27th Nov last The annual plots showed 2009 presumably based on year to date The smoothed average showed a clear downturn since 2005 contradicting UK Met Office public statements at that time that global average temperatures were not indicating any downturn I cannot help suspecting that the sudden disappearance of HADCRUT3 is connected with its clear evidence of a downturn especially at the same time as the Copenhagen meeting when journalists and others will probably be looking for such data to inform their reports I am not so dumb as to believe that three or four years lower temperature has anything to do with climate but many people are and the removal of what could be used as contrarian evidence just in case is further evidence of the cynical manipulation of climate data in order to manage public opinion Peter Lloyd Posted Dec 12 2009 at 11 11 AM Permalink Reply PS the URL I was using was Peter Lloyd Posted Dec 12 2009 at 11 21 AM Permalink Reply Good grief Going senile But this URL produces the data in a different format http hadobs metoffice com hadcrut3 diagnostics global nh sh leah Posted Dec 12 2009 at 8 47 PM Permalink Reply Rather then sitting on your butt crunching numbers why not take a trip to northern Ontario or Yukon Territories and ask the Inuits what it has been like loosing their caribou polar bears seals for their hunt due to the ice melting How about taking a trip to the North pole and see how it once was compared to now Why not go by the mountain folks and ask them about the changes to the planet and how it has been affecting them why not ask the fisherman on the East coast about the lack of fish compared to even 10 years ago This is what Al Gore is doing Crunching a bunch of numbers on a computer tell you nothing Any idiot who thinks there is nothing going on with the planet ought to have their head examined and deemed mentally incapacitated You sir are a moron I am a general public who is not a mathematician or a scientist and even I can see what we human beings are doing to the planet Get off your high horse and look around and ask real questions to people who depend on what the earth provides for their livelihood My advise to you is to shut down your web site but before you do that I recommend you appologize to the scientists who are looking and asking the hard questions regarding their environment and providing data that is worthy of them Christoph Posted Dec 15 2009 at 11 36 AM Permalink Reply snip no food fight Peter Lloyd Posted Dec 16 2009 at 1 01 PM Permalink Reply leah You are entitled to your opinion as is anyone But I can assure you that no one especially the people who maintain and contribute to this blog with a serious interest in climate change global warming AGW whatever you prefer to call it thinks that nothing is going on with the planet It is just because something is most definitely going on that real scientists want to find out exactly what is happening what is causing it why and what is most likely to happen in the near future It s obvious you feel very strongly about this subject but I ask you to accept that many scientists feel just as strongly about these environmental problems as you do perhaps even more so because their training gives them a deeper insight into how many factors must interact to produce climate change and how few of them we understand properly Your advice to ask the people who are experiencing the effects of climate change will do nothing to clarify or solve problems because they do not know why these things are happening to them or whether they have happened in the past That is what scientists are for Don t you think it would be a good idea to let them get on with their job And maybe ask them some questions about what they have found out already before calling them morons I promise you some of them not enough maybe are quite smart Steve Please discuss this on Unthreaded Nothing to do with Blog Rules Jeff Alberts Posted Dec 12 2009 at 10 24 PM Permalink Reply Looks like mine and Leah s posts both broke the blog rules Dammit Michael Larkin Posted Dec 13 2009 at 7 59 AM Permalink Reply I love this blog only started coming here in earnest when Climategate broke and must have spent over 100 hours since then trying to get to grips with the science I think I ve learnt a lot and feel greatly indebted to Mr McIntyre One thing I wondered if it s not in the spirit of climateaudit that s fine of course would it be possible to have a general thread where people could post interesting links not really for discussion purposes Just a place to go for news items or whatever I ask this because when I plough my way through the threads I often find an interesting link and I think wouldn t it be nice if lots of links like this with just a brief description of what they were about were all gathered in one place Just a thought The blog is wonderful any way of course DavidM Posted Dec 19 2009 at 7 40 AM Permalink Reply I think you and your site are great Unfortunately being a lowly Comp Sci grad I can t contribute much to the scientific discussion but I can help with proof reading Do keep it up I m sure there s a lot of very influential people in that hit count Feel free to delete this post the supposedly carefully proxies included carefully selected proxies so what s so whats so what s I ve posting comments I ve posted comments CathysBlog Posted Dec 20 2009 at 10 25 PM Permalink Reply Stephen McIntyre I would like to thank you from the bottom of my heart for being the watchdog for the world I saw the fox news report tonight It was awesome Hugh Pavletich Posted Dec 24 2009 at 2 22 AM Permalink Reply It was very pleasing to see how James Delingpole in the UK Spectator gave Mr McIntyre full credit for his work And the Canadian Macleans magazine as well It is to be hoped that others with the technical skills and integrity take the load off Mr McIntryre and assist him in auditing the data from the Institutions belatedly releasing it Nothing will happen with respect to this issue until public confidence of the climate science community is restored We have a very long wy to go on that score Chris Posted Dec 25 2009 at 5 10 PM Permalink Reply Steve I guess I could have posted this under the Von Storch article thread but I had a comment deleted on the Jones reviews Mann topic with a note of breaches blog policies so I came here to try and figure out what I did wrong I think the deleted comment referred to CO2 not being a pollutant and expanded on that issue very briefly in reply to Norbert whose comment was removed also as OT The minutiae of that particular set of snips is not my point here though It seems to me that for many people coming to Climate Audit the Von Storch editorial could be seen as somewhat analogous to at least part of Climate Audit s blog policy In brief the hockey team behaved badly but the science of AGW is still sound I say this because of the repeated snips of anti AGW comments I realize that many posters make duplicate points and many others blather on and go off topic I would suggest allowing general anti AGW comments on most of the non technical posts there have been plenty since Climategate broke while perhaps snipping restatements of the same content Perhaps some code could be written to highlight duplicates to facilitate this Its usefulness would extend beyond any one type of offending comments I get the idea about not wanting to hear someone disprove AGW in a few sentences but at some point you have to consider the big picture that s been alluded to by a number of warmists who have commented here Is Climate Audit only about poking holes in specific scientific disciplines which are used to support AGW theory while AGW theory in general otherwise remains sound If yes does the substantial work of Climate Audit really matter in the big scheme of things I know I got here years ago compliments of Steven Milloy of Junkscience com which obviously focuses much more on the policy political aspects of things I appreciate the detailed technical focus but at the same time I think at some point the detail needs to lead to some big picture conclusions Otherwise it may seem to many to just be a case of trivial scientific one upmanship Perhaps you ve already considered this sort of thing since the deluge of site hits since Climategate If not my request is that you consider that sometimes it is very difficult to avoid the general case against AGW Staying on topic is critical but this is Climate Audit and not just Proxy Audit MrPete Posted Dec 25 2009 at 7 04 PM Permalink Reply By definition this blog is not about policy Not only that this blog is not about pro or anti AGW Surprised This blog is about science And more specifically this blog tends to specialize in statistical aspects of climate science Thus general comments reflecting pro con opinions are not helpful because they have no bearing on the science at all You ask Is Climate Audit only about poking holes in specific scientific disciplines which are used to support AGW theory while AGW theory in general otherwise remains sound I don t think you ll find anyone here claiming the soundness of AGW theory in general Perhaps a frustration to you you won t find people here demonstrating that it s been falsified in general either The unknowns are too large in any direction And that s the problem with making blanket statements We are all wired to want to come to a conclusion quickly But it ain t that easy Hope that helps Chris Posted Dec 25 2009 at 8 48 PM Permalink Reply MrPete Thanks for the feedback I wasn t suggesting the allowance of primarily policy comments When I say anti AGW I m referring to the science I ve been following the weather since back in the mid 1970s when the articles were talking about the coming ice age and I was skeptical of that scenario back then as a kid The AGW theory broke out sometime back in the late 1970s or at the latest around 1980 so I hardly think the term quickly has applied to AGW scientific theories conclusions for at least 10 years or more And when I say conclusions I mean opinion is also the wrong term While someone s well informed conclusion may be proven wrong it is still far beyond a simple opinion You can play with semantics and call someone s position a scientific theory or downplay it and call it an opinion The Climategate material clearly shows some strong opinions among the guys who were supposed to be doing science I don t think your position that opinions have no bearing on the science at all can be supported across the board It s not a frustration either I think you missed my point My suggestions are more geared towards the relevance of Climate Audit in the big picture Given the decades now invested in AGW research the science ought to be leading somewhere I see overwhelming evidence for where it s leading based on years of reading various scientists as well as policy makers and I m suggesting Climate Audit be a bit more tolerant of well articulated comments that go beyond just the science guys hashing out their arguments That doesn t mean Climate Audit is taking a position on the big picture either That s a step further I know Climate Audit has allowed additional commentary in many ways already so I m not suggesting a big stretch Obviously I m just someone who reads Climate Audit among many other sites on AGW so no one has to take my suggestions Based on my reading of thousands of the comments posted here I don t think I m out on a limb however MrPete Posted Dec 26 2009 at 1 38 AM Permalink Reply Given the decades now invested in AGW research the science ought to be leading somewhere That s the point though isn t it If the investment has been seriously watered down by invalid and even poor analysis then we ve made much less progress than we ought And if people have been hiding the real uncertainty levels in their work then we ve made much less progress than we ve been led to believe Steve has been pretty articulate about his conclusions They just aren t conclusions that make people happy Listen to his recent Fox interview Asked if AGW is real his response in essence was I don t think we know if it is a big problem a medium problem or a tiny problem Elsewhere he s opined that it may take decades to get a better answer At its heart this is why the science is still such an important challenge And this is why it is important to let CA still be about the science There are lots of places to make declarations of this or that Dale Nason Posted Dec 28 2009 at 7 10 PM Permalink Reply Hi Steve As a research chemist by profession I have felt frustrated by the lack of hard source data in most media stories about global warming So I was pleased to discover that the National Geographic website now boasts an interactive climate change simulator based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC data The following table shows the results of different scenarios when worldwide CO2 emissions are varied from a 50 increase in emissions from 2012 to 2050 to a 95 reduction in emissions over the same time period All other factors held constant The model s predicted CO2 Level Temperature Change and Net Change shown are for the year 2100 CO2 CO2 Temp Net Change ppm Change Change 50 626 3 5 0 552 3 2 0 3 50 479 2 8 0 7 80 434 2 6 0 9 95 408 2 4 1 1 The predicted 3 50C global temperature increase by the year 2100 if CO2 emission levels increase 50 by 2050 did not surprise me since this data point has been fairly widely publicized in the media What did shock me was the relatively small effect a 95 reduction in CO2 emissions had compared to my baseline of a 50 increase How could a 145 overall reduction in CO2 emissions generate only a 1 1 0C drop in the predicted temperature increase In my judgment the IPCC s own model makes it abundantly clear that too much attention is being focused on CO2 levels I have often wondered how a gas that only comprises about 0 04 of the atmosphere could have such a strong effect on global temperatures Your exploration of the somewhat ignored role of boundry layer clouds might provide the answer Perhaps water vapor is the real culprit Anand Rajan KD Posted Jan 4 2010 at 11 05 AM Permalink Reply Hi Steve I ve been consuming climate information from CA heavily in the past month and a half The site is very informative and the tone of discussion is just right Climategate is most certainly not business as usual to use a tired phrase and if there have been some heated discussions it is only so because it is appropriate Much appreciated Anand telecorder Posted Jan 8 2010 at 11 20 AM Permalink Reply Nice post about the fallacy of the AP review of the Climategate e mails http bigjournalism com lotts 2010 01 08 as climategate becomes pressgate questions for the media more 342 kzb Posted Jan 14 2010 at 1 49 PM Permalink Reply It s been put to me that despite all the excitement about the CRU files there is no evidence the computer codes therein were ever actually used to produce published material As such it s a big fuss over what could be effectively doodles I don t believe this however the whole thing looks suspicious to me As a relative novice to this world can someone tell me what the actual concrete allegations are WHAT published reports or articles contain plots thought to be generated by the codes in question the briffa fudge factor codes and what misleading conclusions did they come to as a result of the plots Richard Drake Posted Jan 15 2010 at 4 34 AM Permalink Reply This is how I sometimes feel about posting here Only kidding I wanted to try the image tag somewhere safe Works well in preview as well I did have a more serious question Why did the first of my posts to The Mosher Timeline this morning 3 37 blog time get referred to moderation if that link works for anyone but me and is still there AFAICT but my second went through right away Steve probably due to links The referring to moderation is by the WordPress algorithm not a manual moderation Richard Drake Posted Jan 15 2010 at 4 36 AM Permalink Reply Aha the image didn t work out so good once it was posted The moderation question remains though Richard Drake Posted Mar 2 2010 at 6 17 AM Permalink Reply I ve managed to get two successive quite different posts referred to moderation this morning They both have five external links is that the clue I think I ll go and do something else for a bit Steve I don t see it in moderation Dave Dardinger Posted Jan 22 2010 at 4 01 PM Permalink Reply Re Mesila Jan 22 15 46 This isn t the place to post your message Try Unthreaded instead If your message disappears which I expect it will try reposting it there Of course admitting that you don t know the science and that shows in your post isn t going to make Steve Mc likely to bend over backwards to keep it around there either DeWitt Payne Posted Jan 25 2010 at 2 07 PM Permalink Reply Re DeWitt Payne Jan 25 13 20 Now it s not doing it and the buzz on the internet is that it was a false positive Dean Brooks Posted Jan 30 2010 at 9 20 PM Permalink Reply Hello Steve I ve got a draft of a paper explaining some very serious flaws I found in the core equation set of the general circulation models used on IPCC 2007 I wanted you to look at it and recommend people who could review it I e mailed you at the contact address smcintyre25 at yahoo ca back on the 22nd and again yesterday I think maybe I m getting spam filtered I would very much appreciate any help you can give Steve This is outside my area Jerry Browning Tom Vonk like this sort of thing You could try them I d suggest care in making confident assertions Dean Brooks Posted Jan 30 2010 at 11 32 PM Permalink Reply Sorry not to be clearer about this I m aware you don t normally deal with Navier Stokes equations In the letter that went astray I gave some reasons why I think this actually is your area nonetheless You ve been covering the failure of the big red spot to appear faster warming in the upper troposphere and the question of whether it s a fingerprint of AGW I think I can show very simply why it s an artifact of GCM design and will show up as a response to all warming as such And the same design defect leads to some even more interesting questions about water vapor feedbacks in general I don t want to dump unpolished arguments in a public blog Any chance you could e mail me so my reply will get past your spam filter I will send a brief summary and you can decide whether it really is in your domain of expertise Malcolm Shykles Posted Feb 13 2010 at 7 32 AM Permalink Reply Education of Anthropogenic Global Warming and the proposal the effect is totally overwhelmed by convection Explanations of Anthropogenic Global Warming seem to miss the point that both water vapour and C02 need to be present for the effect to work Two examples http news bbc co uk 1 shared spl hi sci nat 04 climate change html greenhouse stm Also in Classic Chemistry Demonstrations published by the Royal Society in 1995 An experiment which is supposed to demonstrate the Greenhouse Effect only appears to work but is reliant on CO2 being 1½ times heavier than air Carbon dioxide heated in a beaker via an infra red lamp will get hot because its density is too high to get convection going in an atmosphere of air The equivalent beaker of air stays cool What is more worrying is that the author replied to my query as follows it does seem that your interpretation of the results may be valid This did not occur to me at the time nor to any of the several teachers who trialled the demonstration and you are the first to point it out The Greenhouse Effect cannot be demonstrated in an earthbound laboratory simply because the effect is totally overwhelmed by the transfer of heat by convection currents as it probably is in the atmosphere itself See below The sun raises the vapours of the equatorial ocean they rise but for a time a vapour screen spreads above and around them But the higher they rise the more they come into the presence of pure space and when by their levity they have penetrated the vapour screen which lies close to the earth s surface what must occur It has been said that compared atom for atom the absorption of an atom of aqueous vapour is 16 000 times that of air Now the power to absorb and the power to radiate are perfectly reciprocal and proportional The atom of aqueous vapour will therefore radiate with 16 000 times the energy of an atom of air Imagine then this powerful radiant in the presence of space and with no screen above it to check its radiation Into space it pours its heat chills itself condenses and the tropical torrents are the consequence The expansion of the air no doubt also refrigerates it but in accounting for those deluges the chilling of the vapour by its own radiation must play a most important part The rain quits the ocean as vapour it returns to it as water How are the vast stores of heat set free by the change from the vaporous to the liquid condition disposed of Doubtless in great part they are wasted by radiation into space Similar remarks apply to the cumuli of our latitudes The warmed air charged with vapour rises in columns so as to penetrate the vapour screen which hugs the earth in the presence of space the head of each pillar wastes its heat by radiation condenses to a cumulus which constitutes the visible capital of an invisible column of saturated air John Tynsall Esq FRS On Radiation through the Earth s Atmosphere Royal Institution Lecture Friday January 23 1863 Eric Kwiatkowski Posted Mar 22 2012 at 4 39 AM Permalink Reply Hello Malcolm I read your post with interest I agree that a laboratory simulation can t mimic the real world for the reasons you describe but I think a properly conducted experiment in a professional laboratory would nevertheless be of interest As far as I can tell for example personal enquiries to the Met Office in the UK and Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center in the USA it seems that no one has formally investigated the effects of varying concentrations of CO2 and water using modern technology and published the results which I find surprising Joe Brannan Posted Mar 6 2010 at 6 57 AM Permalink Reply Tried to e mail the following to Steve M but quoted e mail does not work Did not know how otherwise to get in touch Steve I am a climate sceptic sympathizer who admires your tenacity in unearthing inconsistencies in the AGW argument However I am profoundly dismayed that none of the arguments ever gets a fair hearing in the mainstream press I am British and used to pride myself on the quality of newspapers such as the Independent and Guardian But these same newspapers simply parrot the AGW line with none of the curiosity one would hope for in investigative journalism To me it seems that no matter how good your blog is you will not win the argument without mainstream journalist support The question then becomes how you can persuade one or two scientifically literate writers to critically look at some of the evidence Is there no journalist out there who you are aware of who can start this off I am sure that once the first reputable journalist queries any aspect of the AGW case the dam will burst But who will cast that first stone Regards Joe Brannan Graham Green Posted Mar 7 2010 at 11 07 PM Permalink Reply Hello All I have been writing some little bits of code to look at data available from the UK Met Office Historic Station Data page here http www metoffice gov uk climate uk stationdata There are a couple of stations with very long records dating back to the 1860 s and uninterrupted by the wars etc Armagh Northern Ireland and Oxford Central England It would seem from reading other sources that the Armagh data in particular have been very dilligently reconstructed The temperature data consist of an average maximum and minimum for each month they also have sunshine and rainfall Pretty much needless to say none of the data show anything like an uptick In particular I have been analysing the trend of the monthly deltas That is to say the monthly difference in temperature max min and mean from the previous month Perhaps I m just hugely naive but I expected to see a positive bias in the sum of deltas over such a comparatively long period What I actually get is more or less no slope at all Am I just being dumb or is there any validity in looking at deltas All comments welcomed Best Regards Graham gnmw2 Posted Oct 9 2010 at 1 05 PM Permalink Reply There is an upward trend in the Armagh data of approximately 0 31 degrees Celsius per century for the average monthly maximums and 0 39 degrees per century for the minimums Whether it s statistically significant I don t know Dave Dardinger Posted Mar 31 2010 at 12 12 PM Permalink Reply I was noticing a number of track backs which just appeared and seem to link from Climate Audit to other places in Climate Audit Is this something Steve is doing for research or to draw attention to something or is is something which can be done by an outsider just for the fun of it If the latter it might need to be looked into as it could be used for malicious purposes I expect Steve I added some tags to old posts and updated This seems to have triggered the pingbacks G S Willliams Posted Apr 1 2010 at 12 21 AM Permalink Reply Hi Steve may I commend you for what you have done and what you are doing for us all if anyone deserves an honour it s you Congratulations Steve i have a question which is Where is the proof of Catastrophic global warming I am sure that there is non Cameron McNab Posted May 19 2010 at 10 41 PM Permalink Reply Hi Do you have any useful links on the climate computer modelling that is used This is one area that seems highly suspect I just read Booker s Real Global Warming Disaster It seems that there would be huge potential for model fiddling you could get almost any answer you wanted Cynthia Maher Posted Oct 10 2010 at 7 05 PM Permalink Reply Hi I m looking for a broad overview of your perspective about the climate It seems that the IPCC has concentrated on a relatively small recent time frame for data and a relatively small part of the available data I was hoping to find a wider understanding that includes millions of years extinctions appearance of new species soils affects due to galactic position solar flares and so forth Can you suggest places to look for that level of earth systems science understanding Malcolm Shykles Posted Oct 18 2010 at 3 13 AM Permalink Reply No The best I could find is Shaping the Australian crust over the last 300 million years insights from fission track thermotectonic imaging and denudation studies of key terranes http onlinelibrary wiley com doi 10 1046 j 1440 0952 2002 00942 x full Gerald E Marsh Posted Apr 20 2011 at 4 40 PM Permalink Reply The following was submitted to Science Magazine as a letter in response to Jeffrey Kiehl s Perspective piece 14 January 2011 It was not accepted perhaps not a surprise LESSONS FROM THE EARTH S PAST Jeffrey Kiehl 1 in his perspective Lessons from Earth s Past computes a climate feedback factor of 2 oC w 1m2 by computing the difference in mean global temperature 35 million years ago during the late Eocene compared to pre industrial times and the net radiative forcing due to the difference in carbon dioxide concentrations between these two times This method of computing the feedback factor implicitly assumes that the difference in carbon dioxide concentrations 1000 ppmv vs 300 ppmv is the only relevant factor that could be responsible for the temperature difference Indeed in arguing for this he first accounts for the slight difference in solar constant over this period and then maintains that the paleogeography 35 Myr ago was not radically different from present day geography From this he concludes that Earth s sensitivity to changes in CO2 concentrations may be much larger than that obtained from climate models There are good reasons to be cautious about this conclusion It is well known that the amount of carbon dioxide required to produce sufficient warmth at high latitudes during the Eocene would result in too high a temperature in the tropics 2 The concern that CO2 forcing is not adequate to explain the temperature difference between the present and the Eocene has also been raised by P K Eijl et al 3 the source used by Kiehl to determine the temperature at that period These authors found that the cooling during the Eocene occurred mainly at the poles and if this cooling were due to a reduction in CO2 concentration the tropical regions should also have cooled Since their data shows that they did not the authors suggested that high latitude climate feedbacks such as differences in cloud and water vapor distributions might have been much more important than previously thought There is good reason to believe that this may have been the case Meridional temperature gradients were much smaller during the Eocene and perhaps the most important outstanding question about climate during that period is the mechanism that would allow warm poles without warming the tropics The argument can of course be reversed if the increased temperature at the poles going from the late to early Eocene were due to CO2 the tropics should have been much warmer than was the case Kiehl s claim that The paleogeography of this time was not radically different from present day geography is simply incorrect As seen in the figure the paleogeography 35 Myr ago was significantly different than today In particular the Isthmus of Panama was open as was what is today the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean The closing of the Isthmus of Panama is thought by many to have contributed to the initiation of the cyclic ice ages The formation of the isthmus took some 10 15 million years After its final closure 3 million years ago it cut off the Atlantic and Pacific oceans forcing a reorganization of global ocean currents Although there are indications from modeling studies that North Atlantic deep water formed during the Eocene 4 the reorganization following the closure likely also included the thermohaline circulation in the Atlantic FIGURE AVAILABLE FROM MY WEBSITE POST OF THIS RESPONSE AT gemarsh com Fig 1 Oligocene paleocoastline map 30 Myr ago Note the gap between south and north America and the opening of what later became the Mediterranean into the Indian Ocean Adapted from A G Smith D G Smith and B M Funnell Atlas of Mesozoic and Cenozoic Coastlines Cambridge University Press Cambridge 1994 It is very likely that the distributions of water vapor and clouds were significantly different during the period considered by Kiehl compared to today and that the climate feedback factor was no where near as large as calculated by him References 1 J Kiehl Lessons from Earth s Past Science 331 158 2011 2 P J Valdes Warm climate forcing mechanisms in B T Huber K G Macleod and S L Wing Warm Climates in Earth History Cambridge University Press 2000 and references therein 3 P K Bijl et al Early Palaeogene temperature evolution of the southwest Pacific Ocean Nature 461 776 779 2009 4 M Huber and L C Sloan Heat transport deep waters and thermal gradients Coupled simulation of an Eocene Greenhouse Climate Geophys Res Lett 28 3481 3484 2001 Gerald E Marsh Peter Messenger Posted Jun 2 2012 at 8 02 AM Permalink Reply Dear Mr Marsh I followed the link to your website and will take the time to investigate more of the material in due course I would like to say that the PDF titled 2010 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CLIMATE CHANGE May 16 18 was very interesting As a layman I ve spent a lot of time recently simply trying to get a handle on all aspects of cAGW pros cons principally to enable me to hold rational debates with those in the pro camp Sites such as your s and Mr McIntyre s are a great resource for folk such as me containing balanced viewpoints without all the rancour evident on a superficial search of the Web Thank you both Godfrey Powell Posted Aug 16 2011 at 12 43 AM Permalink Reply As a wonderful opportunity to people like me a retired scientist to get involved in an ongoing debate I would like to ask a naive question A simple back of the envelope calculation suggests to me that the Earth s total vegetation absorbs atmospheric CO2 at an average rate that would in the absence of all other CO2 sources and sinks completely deplete atmospheric CO2 in four months though I have never seen this result discussed anywhere

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/blog-rules-and-road-map/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Gridded Data « Climate Audit
    email Tip Jar The Tip Jar is working again via a temporary location Pages About Blog Rules and Road Map CA Assistant CA blog setup Contact Steve Mc Econometric References FAQ 2005 Gridded Data High Resolution Ocean Sediments Hockey Stick Studies Proxy Data Station Data Statistics and R Subscribe to CA Tip Jar Categories Categories Select Category AIT Archiving Nature Science climategate cg2 Data Disclosure and Diligence Peer Review FOIA General Holocene Optimum Hurricane Inquiries Muir Russell IPCC ar5 MBH98 Replication Source Code Spot the Hockey Stick Modeling Hansen Santer UK Met Office Multiproxy Studies Briffa Crowley D Arrigo 2006 Esper et al 2002 Hansen Hegerl 2006 Jones Mann 2003 Jones et al 1998 Juckes et al 2006 Kaufman 2009 Loehle 2007 Loehle 2008 Mann et al 2007 Mann et al 2008 Mann et al 2009 Marcott 2013 Moberg 2005 pages2k Trouet 2009 Wahl and Ammann News and Commentary MM Proxies Almagre Antarctica bristlecones Divergence Geological Ice core Jacoby Mann PC1 Medieval Noamer Treeline Ocean sediment Post 1980 Proxies Solar Speleothem Thompson Yamal and Urals Reports Barton Committee NAS Panel Satellite and gridcell Scripts Sea Ice Sea Level Rise Statistics Multivariate RegEM Spurious Steig at al 2009 Surface Record CRU GISTEMP GISTEMP Replication Jones et al 1990 SST Steig at al 2009 UHI TGGWS Uncategorized Unthreaded Articles CCSP Workshop Nov05 McIntyre McKitrick 2003 MM05 GRL MM05 EE NAS Panel Reply to Huybers Reply to von Storch Blogroll Accuweather Blogs Andrew Revkin Anthony Watts Bishop Hill Bob Tisdale Dan Hughes David Stockwell Icecap Idsos James Annan Jeff Id Josh Halpern Judith Curry Keith Kloor Klimazweibel Lubos Motl Lucia s Blackboard Matt Briggs NASA GISS Nature Blogs RealClimate Roger Pielke Jr Roger Pielke Sr Roman M Science of Doom Tamino Warwick Hughes Watts Up With That William Connolley WordPress com World Climate Report Favorite posts Bring the Proxies up to date Due Diligence FAQ 2005 McKitrick What is the Hockey Stick debate about Overview Responses to MBH Some thoughts on Disclosure Wegman and North Reports for Newbies Links Acronyms Latex Symbols MBH 98 Steve s Public Data Archive WDCP Wegman Reply to Stupak Wegman Report Weblogs and resources Ross McKitrick Surface Stations Archives Archives Select Month February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/gridded-data/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Tip Jar « Climate Audit
    Icecap Idsos James Annan Jeff Id Josh Halpern Judith Curry Keith Kloor Klimazweibel Lubos Motl Lucia s Blackboard Matt Briggs NASA GISS Nature Blogs RealClimate Roger Pielke Jr Roger Pielke Sr Roman M Science of Doom Tamino Warwick Hughes Watts Up With That William Connolley WordPress com World Climate Report Favorite posts Bring the Proxies up to date Due Diligence FAQ 2005 McKitrick What is the Hockey Stick debate about Overview Responses to MBH Some thoughts on Disclosure Wegman and North Reports for Newbies Links Acronyms Latex Symbols MBH 98 Steve s Public Data Archive WDCP Wegman Reply to Stupak Wegman Report Weblogs and resources Ross McKitrick Surface Stations Archives Archives Select Month February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/tip-jar/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • About « Climate Audit
    depth was not recorded until 1995 and even then by untrained non scientist observers 13 Engine room warming and assumption of a 10m well mixed ocean surface has not been tested by experiment We show from physical and engineering principles and practical experience that engine room warming is negligible and assumption of a 10m well mixed ocean is invalid with reported near surface thermocline gradients 0 01 0 3oCm 1 Near surface thermocline and halocline data contain valuable information and may allow computations of rates of evaporation precipitation runoff and ice melt but are poorly studied 14 We suggest that large discontinuities in the mid twentieth century record may be resolved by completely removing sub sea surface observations and that scientists should collect and analyse detailed near surface salinity temperature depth data as priority ground truth for climate change assessment and modelling Abstract 3 Corrections for non existent engine room warming of seawater intake SWI temperatures caused discrepancies between climate models and probably missed a major shift in sea temperatures Multidisciplinary Eos brought the climate model problem to our attention Vecchi et al 2008 report US models indicate more El Niño like conditions UK more La Niña like This is attributed to transition between surface seawater temperature SST measurement methods from buckets to SWI to modern satellite and buoys SWI engine room warming and evaporative cooling in buckets were suggested errors As a retired multidisciplinary experimental geophysicist and undergraduate student interested in climate change we applied Newtonian experimental physics Experimental data comprising 311 hourly measurements of SST by many methods with simultaneous meteorological and oceanographic data in central Pacific between Tahiti and Hawaii were analysed There was good agreement between all buckets and modern near simultaneous constructed satellite buoy datasets within the limits of monthly averages over 1 degree latitude and longitude Evaporative cooling was absent due to humidity 80 and less than 1min sampling times Engine room heating is impossible with 1second time to intake thermometers and high volumes A thermocline depth of 5m with gradient 0 1oC per meter was found Average correlation between SST and marine air temperature MAT was 0 24 Climate models assume well mixed ocean to 10m and substitute MAT for SST Neither assumption was supported by field data We suggest this arose from reliance on statistical analysis of data from non professional observers on World Meteorological Organisation WMO Voluntary Observing Ships VOS scheme and ships logs lack of ground truth and absence of communication across geophysical sciences and peer review in narrow specialist disciplines The depth of SWI was not recorded from 1955 to 1995 so is useless as measurement of SST Peer review becomes crony review in very narrow disciplines Thus wrong assumptions can propagate and appear in text books without challenge from close colleagues Large numbers of authors may also inhibit challenges We believe the solution is broad training in Newtonian physics and applied mathematics coupled with multi disciplinary study field and laboratory work and a return to scientific method Theory experiment analysis and further refinement is essential We cite examples of multidisciplinary education and focussed well managed cross disciplinary research programs If basic misconceptions arise when we know the equations how much more difficult it will be when tackling complex earth systems problems Climate change is too important to be left to climatologists We need well managed and funded tightly focussed multidisciplinary programs using investigators from many disciplines working cooperatively in future Reference Vecchi G A A Clement and B J Soden 2008 Examining the tropical Pacific s response to global warming EOS 89 9 81 83 Jim Posted Nov 23 2010 at 2 00 PM Permalink Reply Hi J B While I pity any academic who has success limited by unfair reviewers I want more from your comment It would be helpful if you posted some of the comments you got from the reviewers namely the reasons for rejection Without that sort of information it would be easy for anyone who is not your friend to discount you as a sore loser who is bitter about a flawed paper s rejection I am not saying that you are I am only saying that your post provides insufficient information to prove your rejection was unreasonable Another note Nature really They mostly publish newsworthy breakthroughs in fields Your work while important does not sound that important Sorry if I was to frank in this post No offense intended Richard Darienzo Posted Dec 6 2009 at 3 21 AM Permalink Reply J B Micawber your research high lights a issue i ve always had with climate data Until satellites and modern measuring equipment most methods seem to be arbitrary and lacking accuracy It also seems to me that there is little regard for determining the sample size and Lat Long locational distribution for temperature co2 and other global measurement Were those types of observations part of your thought process to start your research To me to get an accurate average earth temperature measurment one would need millions of temperate readings spread around the globe Would you further argue that maybe all global temperature measurements before satellites are simply subject too to many inconsistencies errors and poorly and too few in quantity to be accurate enough to make strong conclusions George Spalding Posted Dec 9 2009 at 5 57 PM Permalink Reply I think you are absolutely right have wondered the same thing myself I calculate that with spacing and number similar to the US it would take at least 60K world wide but satellites should even things out esp w comfirm from ARGOS and landside stations But when you are talking a bout 1 2 degrees C making a big diff reliance on any global info before about 1995 has to be assumptive and is therefore by definition subject to the character of the assumer which appears in short supply with the AGore crowd GS JBnID Posted Dec 27 2009 at 5 16 PM Permalink Reply All it takes for me to determine land based thermometers are no good for climate determination is to ride a motorcycle across the county Where is a meaningful spot to put that pesky instrument Since ground temperature and ground water reflects average year round temperature why isn t it used to determine long term changes Most well logs note the temperature of the aquifer iron Posted Nov 23 2010 at 2 15 PM Permalink Reply Hi JBnID If you are studying a phenomenon in the earth s atmosphere it would be common sense to measure that air s temperature Once a tradition and convention start with measurement who would think of making things inconsistent I see your point about ground temperature having some advantage but it would also bring a host of uncertainties of its own rising and falling water tables different soil types est George Spalding Posted Dec 9 2009 at 5 20 PM Permalink Reply Please look at http www glaciergirl com for an offset site to AGores crumbling Greenland glacier Some US p 38 s had to land in SE GL in 1942 and when Shoffner dug one up in 1992 they had to go down 262 to get it Doesn t seem like any warming there Tony Lam Posted Dec 15 2009 at 5 05 AM Permalink Reply snip editorializing shikisha Posted Dec 21 2009 at 3 22 PM Permalink Reply First time comment so I may be out of date but I assume you would have seen this Here is the report obscured by jargon but with a firm conclusion It is from Robert H Essenhigh Department of Mechanical Engineering The Ohio State University Columbus Ohio 43210 April 2009 As far as I can construe it the conclusion is that while A bomb tests in the 50s 60s increased CO2 by 1000 above normal it had returned to normal after 16 years A spokes lady on the BBC claimed that we still have the emissions of the last 200 years Since CO2 lasts in the atmosphere for only 4 years and not 100 the rise in temperature caused the rise in CO2 and not man made smoke I assume too that you are aware that statements in Germany and the UK confirm that for the last 9 10 years global temperature has been on a plateau no increase Harold Posted Jan 9 2010 at 9 39 AM Permalink Reply I can t find where to post this HADCRUT3 and GISTEMP data for 2009 has been added to the model temp comparison chart at realclimate http www realclimate org index php archives 2009 12 updates to model data comparisons more 1810 This gives 4 years in a row below the prediction an unlikely result if the models were predictive Note that the 2009 data only goes through November Ashley Kwak Posted Jan 25 2010 at 1 14 AM Permalink Reply Subject The Four Major Rivers Restoration Project in Korea Dear Steve McIntyre Greetings I am a PR Manager for the Office of National River Restoration Korea I have known your blog for a while and very impressed about your efforts in articles and posts related in climate change It is no doubt that climate change is one of the most urgent agenda nowadays From this respect I would like to introduce our governmental green growth initiative The Four Major River Restoration Project On 15 August 2008 at a national address on the 60th anniversary of the Republic of Korea President Lee Myung Bak announced a low carbon green growth strategy as a new vision to guide the nation s long term development Six months later in January 2009 the Government of the Republic of Korea responded to the deepening recession with an economic stimulus package equivalent to US 38 1 billion of which 80 per cent the highest ratio among comparable packages from other G20 governments was allocated to environmental themes such as fresh water waste energy efficient buildings renewable energies low carbon vehicles and the rail network More recently on 6 July 2009 the Republic of Korea announced a Five Year Plan for Green Growth to serve as a medium term plan for implementing the National Strategy for Green Growth over the period 2009 2013 With total funding of US 83 6 billion representing 2 per cent of GDP this Five Year Plan intends to turn the strategy into concrete and operational policy initiatives towards achieving green growth The Four Major Rivers Restoration Project is one of the major initiatives for achieving the green growth and addressing climate change In detail the project is intended to address such water related problems as recurring floods and droughts caused by climate change and to create riverside cultural facilities in a bid to upgrade the quality of life of residents in adjacent regions It has begun in January 2009 and comprised an essential part of Korea s mid and long term master plan for green growth including a national strategy and a five year plan to achieve green growth Would it be possible if you could publish our news information on your blog If you are interested in knowing more about this project and or have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me We will provide additional reference materials and information I am looking forward to hearing from you Sincerely yours PR manager Ashley Kwak Mousedot com Inc Klaus Kaiser Posted Feb 1 2010 at 5 28 PM Permalink Reply Dear Mr McIntyre I intend to submit my own book on the climate issue and related affairs to my publisher tomorrow Also I would like to send you an advance copy as pdf file for a possible endorsement If there is any interest please confirm by email and a copy will be sent asap In that case please also provide your mailing address With best regards Klaus L E Kaiser Ph D TerraBase Inc Canada Andy Posted Feb 7 2010 at 2 41 AM Permalink Reply Dear Mr Mcintyre I think this should be brought to your attention It is an article about finance of people arguing against AGW Seeing as they actually include your picture and website they are saying you are in the pay of Exxon at least that is how I read it http www independent co uk environment climate change thinktanks take oil money and use it to fund climate deniers 1891747 html bill Posted Nov 23 2010 at 2 24 PM Permalink Reply andy Agree that financial conflict of interest is a concern His allies would argue that you should judge him by the quality of his arguments and data rather than his sponsors This poses a problem since only a minuscule percentage of people have the expertise to fully understand the complexity of this science let alone figure out why Mac s arguments may be flawed or correct I respect MacIntyre for his successes though Terrence Posted Mar 4 2010 at 10 46 PM Permalink Reply Hello I am responding to your Facebook site http www facebook com topic php topic 17258 post 97038 uid 271730154259 pages Steve McIntyre 271730154259 Judging from the contents I doubt you even know you have one While it is great that you have a following on Facebook I want your position on the global warming issue to be represented accurately bill Posted Nov 23 2010 at 2 27 PM Permalink Reply I agree with Terrence There are a lot of sources that try to establish an individuals views from one out of context quote Without a clear short freely available online statement you cannot clear confusion easily Harold Posted Sep 10 2010 at 11 15 AM Permalink Reply I saw this article on peer review simulations a pretty good argument for considering overhauling peer review http physicsworld com cws article news 43691 bob Posted Nov 23 2010 at 2 39 PM Permalink Reply nothing new But their recommendations sound like a replica of the old system The article did not specify whether the model led to a bias toward accepting weak papers or rejection good ones If I was judging based on what I have seen published flawed papers can fly right past a lazy or inattentive reviewer In my field authors submit a list of peer reviewers who they want to review their work and the editors normally honor those requests One would naturally pick reviewers to maximize odds of acceptance I was under the impression that all fields of science do it that way Robert J Guercio Posted Dec 12 2010 at 5 17 PM Permalink Reply I d like you to consider posting my blog explaining how greenhouse gases cause the stratosphere to cool on your site See http www skepticalscience com Stratospheric Cooling and Tropospheric Warming html Thank you Bob Toki Posted Jun 29 2011 at 12 43 AM Permalink Reply Dudes how do I contact you There is no contact info on the blog mpaul Posted Nov 13 2011 at 3 30 PM Permalink Reply Steve I don t seem to be able to post to CA any longer I ve tried different browser and different computers byu8t every time my comments simply disappear The only explanation I can come up with is that I m on a blocked list for your WordPress account Could this be the case JoeCanuck Posted Dec 6 2011 at 9 56 PM Permalink Reply Well done folks I m not a scientist but I do have more than two neurons to rub together and it has been long getting on my nerves being force fed global warming then when that didn t work climate change and the related hysteria Rarely is any data presented in pre massaged form just as conclusions Then using this I m told from voices high up atop the soap box that if I don t believe in the new messiah I m not just dooming myself but the entire globe All I ask from them is to make it make sense If they re so damned smart they must be able to figure out a way to explain their position in such a way as to make it inevitable that I believe it and willingly sip the kool aid I can only conclude they haven t because they can t I hear demands that I believe and dire predictions and warnings if I don t This ain t my first rodeo if you lay it down and it adds up I ll get it So thanks again folks introducing logic reason and data that makes sense I ve been burned as a witch before so continuing my pariah hood ain t no thang Joe Skiphil Posted Jul 26 2012 at 6 36 PM Permalink Reply Steve don t know if it s important or not but Firefox is giving me an Invalid Security Certificate for Climate Audit and I ve never gotten that message before I was accessing from a link within a WordPress automated email I had subscribed to updates on a thread Perhaps something needs to be renewed or corrected with the site certificate Cling Hillman Posted Oct 10 2012 at 9 06 AM Permalink Reply Steve Skiphil s comment also happens to me Is there any way to solve this Or is it with Firefox only Adrian O Posted Nov 19 2012 at 11 39 PM Permalink Reply AT ARM S LENGTH or THE CONSENSUS ON THE CONSENSUS Hello Steve I found last night this amazing gem in an obscure Doha newspaper Climate Change panel chief says not invited to COP18 The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC will not be attending the upcoming United Nations Climate Change Conference COP18 CMP8 in Doha chairman Dr Rajendra K Pachauri has said For the first time in the 18 years of COP the IPCC will not be attending because we have not been invited he told Gulf Times in Doha COP18 is to be held from November 26 to December 7 http tinyurl

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/about/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • CA Assistant « Climate Audit
    replaced SteveGinIL Posted Jan 2 2010 at 4 05 PM Permalink Re MrPete Jan 2 15 32 Cool Thanks MrPete For the coding the help and the clarifications Remove this too if it is getting in the way Joe Crawford Posted Jan 2 2010 at 4 00 PM Permalink Reply MrPete Thanks a bunch the new features are a great addition to the usability of WordPress The enhancements I ve tried so far work as described ErnieK Posted Jan 2 2010 at 4 20 PM Permalink Reply MrPete I have two observations 1 With the Hide old comments box CHECKED then new comments yellow and green that are attached to old threads gray do not show up at all 2 With the Hide old comments box NOT checked new comments to old threads gray do not seem to be sorting to the bottom They seem to stay with the with the old threads making it necessary to scroll through all the comments to find the newer yellow and green comments that are attached to gray threads If I turn OFF the Threaded display then the new comments do sort to the bottom in both cases Firefox 3 5 6 for Macintosh running OS 10 5 5 MrPete Posted Jan 2 2010 at 6 59 PM Permalink Reply Re ErnieK New comments attached to old threads should still show Just no context If that s not working Hmmmm When old comments show the threads DO move to the bottom but including context So if you add a comment to a 2 yr old thread that whole thread goes to the bottom If I didn t do it that way threaded and unthreaded would be the same Would love inspiration for something better What I want to do soon but it is quite hard provide a slider so you can expand shrink the display One thought is to somehow shrink old comments without making them completely disappear Just not sure what it should look like nor how hard to mangle things to work that way ErnieK Posted Jan 2 2010 at 8 19 PM Permalink Reply don t know what is wrong but those features just ar not working for me Maybe because it is the Mac version As a test I just un installed both Greasemonkey and CA assistant quit Firefox and then restarted and reinstalled them I posted a reply to Mat Pearson s old comment third from the top posted Dec 17 I quit and restarted FF again entered this blog My new comment is still attached to Mat Pearson s comment and still 3rd from the top it was not sorted to the bottom If I change the settings to hide old postings reload the page then Mat Persons and my new reply are both gone If I change the settings and UNCHECK Threaded Display then my new reply does sort to the end and shows up as the latest posting and it does not matter if hide old posting is checked or not Something in the sort is not working right for me ErnieK Posted Jan 2 2010 at 8 45 PM Permalink Reply Re ErnieK Jan 2 20 19 I just noticed that Bob Koss commented on the same issue in the The FOI Myrh 2 topic Jan 2 4 43AM 5 06AM http climateaudit org 2009 12 29 the foi myth 2 comment 213919 http climateaudit org 2009 12 29 the foi myth 2 comment 213922 curious Posted Jan 3 2010 at 8 10 AM Permalink Reply Thanks Pete only just got round to installing this All good so far WillR Posted Jan 3 2010 at 9 33 AM Permalink Reply It sounds like you are continuing to update the script Can you put a date beside the link so we know when an update last occurred I am no longer sure when I installed the script and have no idea if it is the latest Thanks MrPete Posted Jan 3 2010 at 10 53 PM Permalink Reply Yes I ll date the link and incorporate changelog soon Sorry for delays have run into a serious bug in the jQuery toolkit being used that causes major trouble in the next version ErnieK Posted Jan 3 2010 at 11 54 PM Permalink Reply I just wish I knew something about javascrip and jQury I have been trying to find out why the thread sort does not work for me at all It seems that function getMaxTreeID a always returns the ID for the first comment no matter what The first comment ID in this blog is 020993 I planted the following DEBUG s function getMaxTreeID a Return max id from a and its child comment objects var maxC getCmtNum a DEBUG maxC for a maxC j j cmtForm itemElm a each function i var cNum getCmtNum this if cNum maxC DEBUG cNum cNum maxC cNum DEBUG maxC returned maxC return maxC It seems that cNum is always 20993 so it will always be maxC so it is always returned I really don t understand the j j cmtForm itemElm a each function i part of this but if it is supposed to find the ID of the child that belongs to 209933 and then move on to the next nested thread it isn t doing that for me Thread 0209996 has a child 0214063 which should cause it to sort down Any ideas why the thread sort doesn t work on my Mac version of Firefox Part of the Log window botton up Jan 3 8 28 37 PM maxC returned 0209933 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM cNum 0209933 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM maxC for a 0210111 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM maxC returned 0209933 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM cNum 0209933 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM maxC for a 0210111 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM maxC returned 0209933 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM cNum 0209933 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM maxC for a 0209996 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM maxC returned 0209933 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM cNum 0209933 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM maxC for a 0209996 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM maxC returned 0209933 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM maxC for a 0209933 Jan 3 8 28 37 PM cmt setup comments cleaned up Jan 3 8 28 36 PM cmt setup hidden Jan 3 8 28 36 PM Define main functions Jan 3 8 28 36 PM Set up masthead Jan 3 8 28 36 PM Completed initialize MrPete Posted Jan 8 2010 at 8 07 AM Permalink Reply Re ErnieK Jan 3 23 54 Have just finished fixing some other things I ll look into this next and try to provide some debugging tools so you can help nail this down THANKS for digging in MrPete Posted Jan 8 2010 at 1 18 PM Permalink Reply Re ErnieK Jan 3 23 54 Found it Fixed in the current version Thanks for your patience ErnieK Posted Jan 8 2010 at 9 25 PM Permalink Reply Re MrPete Jan 8 13 18 Thank you MrPete for fixing it It is so much nicer when the new threads sort to the bottom I can even hide the old comments now oneuniverse Posted Jan 7 2010 at 10 16 AM Permalink Reply Using version 0 7 even better thank you Request 1 no sliding toolbars please or make it optional Request 2 comment numbering to aid the reading of old threads contained in thread numbered references apparently from a time when CA did have numbered comments Nested comments are nice when reading a finished thread but I find them difficult to use when the thread is developing oneuniverse Posted Jan 7 2010 at 10 17 AM Permalink Reply Re oneuniverse Jan 7 10 16 I should have written version 0 0 7 not 0 7 oneuniverse Posted Jan 7 2010 at 11 30 AM Permalink Reply Re oneuniverse Jan 7 10 16 MrPete I think I misunderstood the mention of sliding toolbar I thought you meant a toolbar that slides around the window to always keep itself on screen as the user scrolls about the document Please strike that request wish if you were referring to something different MrPete Posted Jan 8 2010 at 8 12 AM Permalink Reply Re oneuniverse Jan 7 10 16 You understood sliding toolbar partly correct What I want is a tool optional yes that stays on screen The tool will itself be a slider control to dynamically adjust how many comments you see by age If you ve used the free picasa photo software it has a similar slider for photo searching by age Comment numbering the way you want is unfortunately impossible and also tends to be unreliable particularly on older threads 1 The comment numbers always referred to the visible comment number at the time the comment was written Those numbers changed as comments were moderated moved to other threads etc 2 In the new system we cannot change the information generated by the host system 3 Unfortunately 2 means the only kind of numbering available is generated by your browser i e 1 N based on the currently visible comments at the outermost level Pretty useless Bottom line that s why the new Reply Paste links are based on author date time instead of comment numbers oneuniverse Posted Jan 11 2010 at 11 02 AM Permalink Reply Re MrPete Jan 8 08 12 Thanks MrPete I m guessing I d still find an option to recreate comment numbers useful even if the references by comment end up being a bit off except for periods with high commenting rates or high number of posts that need to be removed I d expect the numbering errors to be small But anyway there doesn t seem to much demand for this feature other than from me And I realise it could add to the confusion oneuniverse Posted Jan 7 2010 at 10 29 AM Permalink Reply Minor point when old comments are highlighted a color scheme of dark gray on light gray is used one has to strain slightly to read it MrPete Posted Jan 8 2010 at 8 13 AM Permalink Reply Re oneuniverse Jan 7 10 29 If you want to read it don t call it old just make your old setting even older DeWitt Payne Posted Jan 12 2010 at 6 01 PM Permalink Reply MrPete How about killfile capability where you could hide posts of individuals on a list I ve installed the one from the link but I haven t tested it yet DeWitt Payne Posted Jan 13 2010 at 12 56 PM Permalink Reply Re DeWitt Payne Jan 12 18 01 The killfile addon for GreaseMonkey works at The Air Vent but not at The Blackboard or CA Richard Drake Posted Jan 20 2010 at 2 02 PM Permalink Reply Cool change to Recent Comments thanks MrPete Lucy Skywalker Posted Jan 23 2010 at 4 22 AM Permalink Reply Hi MrPete your assistant is wonderful but I ve found a problem I want to direct people to the climate science page on my website but it cuts my URL short Needs room for 3 more characters MrPete Posted Jan 27 2010 at 12 51 AM Permalink Reply Sorry I don t know what the it is that is cutting your URL short and or has too little room Lucy Skywalker Posted Jan 27 2010 at 4 59 AM Permalink Reply Re MrPete Jan 27 00 51 I seem to have sorted it out don t know what it was but it doesn t matter now Thanks for help DeWitt Payne Posted Jan 25 2010 at 1 26 PM Permalink Reply Version 0 9 that is supposed to be better at The Blackboard isn t The reply with link button and color coded highlighting of the author of a post that used to be there is now gone MrPete Posted Jan 27 2010 at 12 50 AM Permalink Reply DeWitt There s a bit of synchronization needed with Lucia I may have released the new version too early Patience and I think you ll see CA Assistant working again on her site without a further update on your part John Baltutis Posted Jan 28 2010 at 11 53 PM Permalink Reply So is there an assistant off in the future that ll support Macs and Safari I d kill to be able to disable threaded comments It s slow torture to go through comments in its default state MrPete Posted Jan 29 2010 at 12 09 AM Permalink Firefox on Mac works GreaseMonkey is a req t and not available on Safari yet John Baltutis Posted Jan 29 2010 at 1 47 AM Permalink Thanks but not interested in using FireFox No other way to suppress threaded comments MrPete Posted Feb 4 2010 at 5 12 PM Permalink Not without breaking it for everybody Anastassia Makarieva Posted Jan 27 2010 at 12 30 PM Permalink Reply The link to Sylvie Gravel s manuscript from here http climateaudit org 2009 03 04 a peek behind the curtain comment 178581 which should be here http www climateaudit org pdf others browning pdf does not seem to work MrPete Posted Feb 4 2010 at 5 11 PM Permalink Reply Yes fixing those links is a future feature DCC Posted Feb 1 2010 at 3 22 PM Permalink Reply Had trouble installing the Java Script At first I thought it was interference from Firefox preloader but nothing worked until I disabled all my other add ons Java Quick Start may have been the baddie but I also disabled IE Tab LastPass and AdBlock Plus Henry Posted Feb 4 2010 at 4 45 PM Permalink Reply Very impressive though I was spooked when initially I could not find a 2 day old comment of mine on a thread Sorted out now but does it have to hide old comments by default MrPete Posted Feb 4 2010 at 5 11 PM Permalink Reply Yeah I think I ll change the default in the next version AMac Posted Feb 13 2010 at 9 55 AM Permalink Reply The CA Assistant script has terrific features Like Henry I d like to control when older comments are condensed I read SETTINGS There s a settings popup available in the top right corner of the page Open it modify the General and Comment tab settings as you see fit and save Um the popup is in the top right corner of what page I can t seem to figure out what it is or how to open it AMac Posted Mar 2 2010 at 2 39 PM Permalink Reply SETTINGS There s a settings popup available in the top right corner of the page Open it modify the General and Comment tab settings as you see fit and save This is still a mystery to me In FireFox 3 6 what would the settings popup look like I d find it in the top right corner of what page AMac Posted Mar 2 2010 at 2 43 PM Permalink Reply SETTINGS OK got it With the CA Assistant script running it s at the top right corner of every Climate Audit web page The word Settings is in yellow type Cool MrPete Posted Mar 31 2010 at 10 38 PM Permalink Reply Re Oliver K Manuel Mar 16 10 15 Because Paypal is how donations happen Tenuc Posted Apr 5 2010 at 8 55 AM Permalink Reply Many thanks for this Have installed and am of to try my first post using it at WUWT Mike from salisbury Posted Apr 5 2010 at 9 28 AM Permalink Reply great script great improvements anna v Posted Apr 28 2010 at 5 29 AM Permalink Reply I have found it very useful Unfortunately with the change in the Wattsupwiththat format the reply with link link is missing there The preview panel is there and seems to work just the facility with linking to the post quoted is lost anna v Posted May 26 2010 at 12 40 AM Permalink Reply I am relying on the assistant for previewing messages for WUWT and it is great for long posts But preview is the only thing that works after the change of format on that blog few weeks ago I no longer get color for newer nor Reply link which were very useful when they were working The links used to work from the preview panel so one could check if they were correct but now one has to post to see them Any hope anna MrPete Posted Jun 12 2010 at 9 54 AM Permalink Reply Re anna v May 26 00 40 Sorry anna life s been busy I ll look at an update when I get a chance Since it s been almost six months perhaps the underlying tools have improved enough that I can make some other improvements as well MikkelR Posted Aug 4 2010 at 3 17 PM Permalink Reply What a tool I have been How silly of me that I until now didn t bother downloading this amazing tool Long time reader but have managed with the posts in the old fashioned cumbersome survey and semi read all approach for keeping taps on interesting discussions Only the recent rather interesting fast flowing discussions at recent posts made me give in and download I now wonder what kept me from doing it much sooner Merely posting this to bump the thread into recent posts and potentially inspire others to utilize the assistant as well Oh and also to say thank you MrPete for a job very well done MrPete Posted Sep 1 2010 at 6 08 AM Permalink Reply Chrome Safari Opera users does CA Assistant work for you Safari Mac Windows now has GreaseKit which is eventually supposed to support all kinds of GreaseMonkey scripts Opera Mac Linux Windows has a similar GM emulator function Chrome Mac Linux Windows now has native support for GreaseMonkey In theory even IE can handle GM scripts if you install Trixie And of course GM was originally designed for FireFox Mac Linux Windows So with these advances and discoveries can anyone confirm whether CA Assistant works on Safari Opera Chrome and maybe even IE I d love to update the top post with how to s for these other browsers dougie Posted Sep 1 2010 at 2 18 PM Permalink Reply Hi MrPete what is the Installation Process for IE Cheers MrPete Posted Sep 1 2010 at 4 42 PM Permalink Reply dougie I don t know The link to Trixie above is for an IE add on that supposedly enables GreaseMonkey scripts to work in IE Follow the instructions there and see what you can find This first round of experiments will require folks who have some technical expertise Once we know how it works we can write simple instructions for everyone else dougie Posted Sep 1 2010 at 5 42 PM Permalink Reply ok MrPete no probs will have a play get back to you with any further comments queries 1st attempt can t get it to work but late I m probably doing something stupid thanks for all your time on this much appreciated dougie Posted Sep 2 2010 at 2 05 PM Permalink In IE8 i now get a error on page message on bottom left status bar on all CA tabs message on opening reads Webpage error details User Agent Mozilla 4 0 compatible MSIE 8 0 Windows NT 5 1 Trident 4 0 Mozilla 4 0 compatible MSIE 6 0 Windows NT 5 1 SV1 NET CLR 2 0 50727 NET CLR 1 1 4322 NET CLR 3 0 4506 2152 NET CLR 3 5 30729 Timestamp Thu 2 Sep 2010 18 58 09 UTC Message return statement outside of function Line 72 Char 2 Code 0 URI http climateaudit org ca assistant not sure if that helps anyone John Baltutis Posted Sep 1 2010 at 5 28 PM Permalink Reply Installed all conponents have SIMBL GreaseKit and the CA Assistant installed and selected w Safari 5 0 1 on Mac OS X 10 6 4 However there are no features or settings available Thus I conclude it s a bust MrPete Posted Sep 1 2010 at 10 04 PM Permalink Reply Re John Baltutis Sep 1 17 28 Can you see any difference on CA with it loaded top right of each page should have linkable text in gold Recent Comments list should be reorganized header of each comment should look different Post a Comment area should have a toolbar and a Preview button If nothing at all yes a bust on Safari for now I ve got some new Mac Mini servers here so eventually may be able to diagnose this Thanks for trying John Baltutis Posted Sep 1 2010 at 10 28 PM Permalink Nothing Tis a bust No changes at all The mechanism works as far as getting the GreaseKit menu and having your script show up as an option Maybe the script needs tweaking but that s beyond my ken boballab Posted Sep 1 2010 at 8 45 PM Permalink Reply I just put it into Chrome All I had to do was start up Chrome navigate to CA then to this page and clicked on the link to the script and chrome did an automatic install From there I verified it by opening the Tool menu selected extension and there it was Extensions 1 Developer mode CA Assistant Open Science webring edition Version 1 0 Enhances user experience on Open Science Web Ring courtesy of Climate Audit Disable Uninstall Allow this extension to run in incognito Not seeing much difference so far but then again I mostly had used IE8 but the Chrome rendered page runs faster and looks sharper and Lucia s loads very fast compared to the click and wait when using IE8 MrPete Posted Sep 1 2010 at 10 05 PM Permalink Reply Re boballab Sep 1 20 45 Sounds great See my reply above MrPete Sep 1 22 04 for the kinds of things that ought to be different if it is working boballab Posted Sep 1 2010 at 11 02 PM Permalink No Joy it doesn t put an Icon up on the screen for me to click on to set options nor have an options menu under the extensions manager I downloaded a Chrome extension that works with wordpress so you can compare the the two and see what I mean about the option menu CA Assistant Open Science webring edition Version 1 0 Enhances user experience on Open Science Web Ring courtesy of Climate Audit Disable Uninstall Allow this extension to run in incognito WordPress Comments Notifier by HelloLogic Version 0 1 0 4 Be notified when you have pending comments on your WordPress blog Disable Uninstall Options Allow this extension to run in incognito The wordpress extension placed a small WordPress Icon in my top toolbar that lets me open it don t have that with CA assistant unfortunately I m not that up on Java script but you might want to download Chrome and do what I did and put in a known working extension and pull up the script in the Developer option under the control the current page menu The script installed with no error message shows up in the extension manager but just has no options settings and no features in use MrPete Posted Sep 1 2010 at 11 11 PM Permalink Re boballab Sep 1 23 02 the options are not in the extensions mgr they are on screen at the top right of every CA page Will work on further customizations for chrome when i get a few more round tuits available MrPete Posted Sep 2 2010 at 2 46 PM Permalink Reply Re MrPete Sep 1 06 08 Thanks to all who have tried out these options Some of them appear to hold great promise But as you ve seen CA Assistant doesn t yet work on other browsers It s still fine on FireFox Hopefully we can extend the list in the not too distant future Brian H Posted Sep 9 2010 at 3 34 AM Permalink Reply New at this but the page site I want it to work on most http wattsupwiththat com tips notes to wuwt saving settings and then refreshing page has no effect I use 96 hrs to define old and request hiding but all 1740 responses since 7 27 still show not even color coded The site list includes http wattsupwiththat com Brian H Posted Sep 9 2010 at 4 09 AM Permalink Reply Re Brian H Sep 9 03 34 I use NoScript but it shows no blocked scripts from CA Assistant Are there others that need to be OKed Brian H Posted Nov 8 2010 at 7 57 AM Permalink Reply More problems arising Reply and Reply w Link both come up with Undefined NaN and usually fail to position properly in the thread Update way overdue MrPete Posted Dec 1 2010 at 6 40 AM Permalink Reply Re Brian H Nov 8 07 57 Which site s give you Undefined NaN Brian H Posted Dec 18 2010 at 11 08 PM Permalink Reply Here http judithcurry com 2010 12 17 agu fall meeting part ii comments e g But I ve been using Opera a lot lately to cope with memory tie ups and don t see the scripts much Brian H Posted Feb 5 2011 at 8 08 PM Permalink Reply Re Brian H Dec 18 23 08 Threaded sites produce multiples of Reply w Link tag 2 12 or so and they don t work properly or sometimes at all Changing Settings on one site affects all sites which is very inconvenient since different situations exist depending on of comments threading type etc Often the controls appear on the upper right and appear properly but nothing actually happens Eg http wattsupwiththat com 2011 02 03 has the bbc has broken faith with the general public I have screenshots of some of the above but can t attach with the Image button which wants URLs only DC Posted Apr 20 2011 at 2 22 PM Permalink Reply Any chance that the Latex in a comment could be compiled in the preview Stu Miller Posted May 4 2011 at 9 51 PM Permalink Reply Not sure the comment belongs here but one aspect of the site is driving me nuts With CA assistant either on or off the name of the poster is obscured by the data on when posted I am running a pc with Mozilla Firefox I have the latest firefox version but it has performed the same way on all the earlier versions as well Is this a characteristic of the site or is there a simple fix on my end R S Brown Posted Jun 8 2011 at 5 41 PM Permalink Reply I suddenly seen to have a problem editing comments both here and at WUWT Both site editing problems seem related to changes coming quietly from wordpress com and not announced through standard Climate Audit or WUWT site announcements Here once the comment goes longer than the first frame of the comment box I can t scroll up or down to edit text or html especially if I ve pasted in material from a text file or set up a link to additional information There s no bar at the left side of the comment box to use to scroll up or down although I can use the arrow keys to move within the box Is this some sort of work in progress RomanM This appears to be something new implemented by WordPress I tested it and when I reached the bottom of the box it expanded automatically so that I could still see my entire comment The same feature has also appeared at my own WordPress blog craigm Posted Jul 25 2011 at 4 51 AM Permalink Reply hi Steve many thanks for your august work I am new to the world of climate hoo haa and wonder if you had ever looked at Applied Mathematica by Shaw and Tigg It has the most marvellous elegant simple yet incredibly powerful algorithm section in one of the later chapters called maximum entropy data reconstruction I found a copy on the net http www fishpond com au Books Applied Mathematica William T Shaw Jason Tigg 9780201542172 cf 3 mine is somewhere hmmm an algorithm for finding lost books The time series previous chapter is also a hoot Keep up the fabulous work all the best Craig Oxbridge Prat Posted Aug 5 2011 at 3 57 PM Permalink Reply Have just upgraded everything and CA assistant no longer works Or rather it s clearly working far too effectively in that it s hiding almost all the comments presumably those older than a certain age If I bring up the settings box then I can t see anything between the three buttons at the top and the three at the bottom just a big black space Windows 7 firefox 5 0 1 greasemonkey latest version CA assistant 0 0 9 Build 41 Oxbridge Prat Posted Aug 6 2011 at 2 58 PM Permalink Reply Downgrading to firefox 3 6 has solved the problem I can now see the controls and set them up as I wish Richard Drake Posted Jan 5 2012 at 3 33 AM Permalink Reply I m now having exactly this problem with Firefox 9 0 1 For other reasons to do with making another program work not understood I ve had to change profiles and start again with no add ons cookies etc When I install Greasemonkey and CA Assistant the settings box is blank and many comments like all on this thread suppressed exactly as described by OP I have reasons not to want to go back to 3 6 I know this churning of versions in the open source world is a pain to the part time developer but I wonder if MrPete has any clues of what the problem is so that I can fiddle with the code myself with a bit more direction Richard Drake Posted Jan 5 2012 at 5 30 AM Permalink Reply I ve fixed the problem by manualling editing prefs js in the new profile I m using something that s not recommended by Mozilla First quit from Firefox Then copy all lines in prefs js starting with user pref greasemonkey scriptvals ca assist from the profile you ve been using and happy with and replace all those in the new profile of the same form But don t replace or change anything else Clear as mud I m sure if you google prefs js it may become clearer This would allow Oxbridge Prat to use a more recent version of Firefox for example It can t help you though if you re starting with a more recent version and trying to install and configure CA Assistant for the first time Richard Drake Posted Jan 5 2012 at 5 31 AM Permalink manually editing J Felton Posted Aug 21 2011 at 11 39 PM Permalink Reply I seem to be having trouble installing the script GreaseMonkey installed just fine but CA Assistant refuses to do anything Clicking Install does nothing I tried disabling the Java add ons as someone suggested but I am still having the same problem Any help would be greatly appreciated Oxbridge Prat Posted Aug 22 2011 at 2 41 AM Permalink Reply J Felton I had that problem too Reinstalling greasemonkey fixed it No this doesn t make sense but it did at least in in my case work Ashok Posted Nov 11 2011 at 6 53 PM Permalink Reply Dear Mr McIntyre I need to get in touch with you re hockey style graph related business opportunity Pl respond to my email and I will send you the detail Thanks with warm regards Ashok anna v Posted Jan 5 2012 at 3 59 AM Permalink Reply I am running firefox 9 0 1 and comments appear as usual when I click on settings the three buttons on top are inactive too I guess I was lucky that the change kept the desired parameters Richard Drake Posted Jan 5 2012 at 4 06 AM Permalink Reply anna v Jan 5 at 3 59 AM Perhaps it s truer to say that I ve been unlucky in the last 24 hours I don t think my problems were caused by upgrading from Firefox 8 to 9 But what I assume is true is that every existing user of CA Assistant is living on a bit of a knife edge as they upgrade beyond Firefox 3 6 and anyone coming in to CA or WUWT or the other blogs for the first time with a more modern version will not have much joy with CA Assistant Brian H Posted Jan 5 2012 at 7 16 AM Permalink Reply Re Richard Drake Jan 5 04 06 Yes for reasons unrelated online work requires using only FF 6 7 or 8 I have not upgraded to 9 despite repetitious prompts by the FF updater This is one more reason to hold off BTW that bit mentioned above about the date etc making the poster s name unreadable is a real PITA The only workaround I ve found is that hovering the pointer over the gravatar image if present pops up a micro bio with the name in full MrPete Posted Jan 5 2012 at 11 01 AM Permalink Reply Ouch OK I ll schedule time ASAP to review browser compatibility and see what I can do to clean this up I ll also check to see if there have been any library upgrades that may allow us to improve the CA Assistant in other ways One hoped for fix is to make photos in comments workable matthu Posted Feb 9 2012 at 4 28 PM Permalink Reply Testing aaa bbb bob edgar Posted Jun 5 2012 at 4 30 AM Permalink Reply Re MrPete Jan 5 11 01 It would help me if you d publish here the values that the settings for Greasmonkey CAA can have then it would be possible to edit them manually via about config For example isOld takes a numeric string and I m guessing it s in hours but can t be certain Another one is bHideOld which defaults to checked but unchecked doesn t seem to be the correct value I ll probably Use the Source but I think a posting here perhaps at the top so it stays visible would be nice to have bob MrPete Posted Jun 5 2012 at 11 23 AM Permalink Re bob edgar Jun 5 04 30 No need to manually edit the settings Have you noticed the little control panel at the top right of the screen when in a CA Assistant active site Lucy Skywalker Posted Mar 31 2012 at 4 38 AM Permalink Reply Mr Pete I ve long used Ca assistant here and at WUWT Recently I installed it at Tallblokes Talkshop WordPress but while I have the array of formatting buttons the Preview does not function Any ideas Thanks for your help It s a wonderful tool MrPete Posted Apr 4 2012 at 10 37 AM Permalink Reply Re Lucy Skywalker Mar 31 04 38 I ll take a look Grrr looks like FireFox is changing itself in ways that break various scripts and the scripting tools Greasemonkey etc are not keeping up To make matters worse we still don t have the anticipated future improvements allowing me to upgrade

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/ca-assistant/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive



  •