Holocaust of the fluffy toys

We took a pile of stuff down the the dump today. I don’t like throwing things away (which is a large part of the problem: thngs accumulate because I can’t bear to throw them away), but it has become necessary – too much stuff has been piling up. The fluffy toys of the title weren’t ours: it was someone we saw there, tipping a whole box of perfectly good toys into the skip. But but but I want to say, there must be someone who wants those… but then again, when the far east pumps out new fluffy toys at such volume at such low price, what margin is there in recycling old ones?
Continue reading “Holocaust of the fluffy toys”

News from Outer Space

A little while ago I wrote about CLOUD which is a CERN expt designed to test theories of cloud-cosmic ray connections, and the mechanisms of how the said CR’s might influence clouds. But there is bad news… they’ve been scooped: A team at the Danish National Space Center has discovered how cosmic rays from exploding stars can help to make clouds in the atmosphere. The results support the theory that cosmic rays influence Earth’s climate. So I suppose the CERN follk will have to find something else to do…

I haven’t a clue about the validity of this (well, OK, I suspect strongly that it will turn out to be not as exciting as it claims, but will have to await someone competent to evaluate it…). Its all in online in “Proceedings of the Royal Society A”, October 3rd, apparently. Although I can’t find it.

[Update: a reader sends me a copy of the paper; how kind. Perhaps unsurprisingly, it is somewhat less dramatic than the press release. Or in my readers words: “What’s noteworthy is the complete lack of discussion of the implications in the Proc RS A paper, but not in the press release. I’m guessing that the reviewers told them to throw out all the unsubstantiated speculation and stick to the facts. We can expect to see this spun wildly…”. Aha! A prediction… the essence of science! -W]

[[Uupdate: Eli has read it too, and isn’t impressed -W]

CO2: just in case you thought some thiings are too mad to consider

One of the things that just about no-one bothers contest is that CO2 is rising from anthropogenic contributions. There are good reasons for this; CO2 is well measured since Mauna Loa; it tracks (scaled by 50% for absoption) the known human sources… and so on. However, its a wide net out there and some people will challenge anything, so we have High CO2 in the 1940’s atmosphere, contrary to IPCC science. Tim Lambert and Jim Easter took this apart before; as far as can be told, the recent post (see fig 1 of the Beck thingy) is just the same mistakes all over again.

S+C 6.0 provisional

It seems there is a new version of the Spencer and Christy MSU product out (see here; S+C must be about the only people that still allow directory listing on their web sites). This is a provisional product and its not clear that there is any great point in talking about it, especially when RSS is likely more reliable.

However, CA have picked it up and the usual nonsense flows out again… but the bit I want to pick out is the bizarre assertion (by McI, comment 19) that of “the cooperative approach of S&C”. As far as I know, no-one has seen their computer code [Oops: see uupdate]. RSS made a major correction to S+C in fixing a sign error for them (which S+C have still not explicitly admitted) but had to do this by back-engineering, since… their code wasn’t available. TP even explicitly asks if anyone has audited this stuff… but of course, no-one is interested in doing that, especially not McI.

[Update: a bit more interestingly, there is a new Fu+J in J Climate which basically says “we still think we’re right” -W]

[Uupdate: According to a Christy email published on CA, Christy did give some – perhaps the vital parts – of his code to RSS. I’m still curious about the time frames of all this, though -W]