Oral testimony at UK Parliamentary Inquiry

Sat Feb 27 03:18:13 CET 2010

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Niet gezien. Bedoel je dit?

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/186442-6

<http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/186442-6>Henk Elegeert

2010/2/26 Cees Binkhorst <ceesbink at xs4all.nl>

> REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl
>
> Heb net nog even zitten luisteren naar Lomberg op CNN.
> Hij vindt dat de kritiek te ver gaat ;)
>
>
> Groet/ Cees
>
> Henk Elegeert wrote:
>
>> REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl
>>
>> 2010/2/23 Cees Binkhorst <ceesbink at xs4all.nl>
>>
>>  REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl
>>>
>>> Onze parlementarieërs worden geacht hun tijd beter te besteden?
>>>
>>> Dit soort shows vinden géén waarheden, noch duidelijkheid.
>>> Kijk maar naar de 'autoshows' in het Congress in de USA.
>>>
>>> Hoe zou jij de te onderzoeken vraag (vragen) formuleren?
>>>
>>>
>> De belangrijkste is natuurlijk, Cees, het bewijs voor de veronderstelde
>> invloed van de mens op het klimaat, en tevens dat de genomen maatregelen
>> dat
>> klimaat dusdanig beïnvloeden dat die werkelijk geen verkeerde of
>> vervelende
>> gevolgen daarvan gaat ondervinden? Gevolgen die mogelijk onvoorzien erger
>> zijn dan het vermogen van het weersysteem om zich(zelf) weer te
>> herstellen.
>>
>> Verder:
>>
>>
>> http://geenklimaat.blogspot.com/2010/02/phil-jones-loopt-helemaal-leeg-op-de.html
>>
>> " *Geen Klimaat*
>> De belangrijkste vraag die we hier niet proberen te beantwoorden is:
>> "Beïnvloedt de mens het klimaat op aarde?". Onder de noemer "Geen Klimaat"
>> zal een beperkt aantal individuen met behulp van wetenschappelijk
>> onderbouwde argumenten, hun ongenuanceerde mening over dit onderwerp
>> geven.
>>
>> maandag 15 februari 2010
>> Phil Jones loopt helemaal leeg op de
>> BBC<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm>
>> <
>> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_HN2WDmsAoOw/S3kyZtHbeuI/AAAAAAAAANg/7tKGamDSuM4/s1600-h/phil+jones.png
>> >
>>
>> Phil Jones heeft onder dwang een lijst vragen van de BBC moeten
>> beantwoorden, hij staat onder curatele en de vragen zijn benatwoord alsof
>> onder ede.
>> De vragen zijn van Roger Harrabin, een BBC klimaat specialist die zeer
>> recentelijk 180 graden gedraaid is op het klimaat punt en zich persoonlijk
>> bedonderd voelt en nu bloed wil zien.
>> De antwoorden zijn verhelderend. Als je alles wil lezen, klik op de titel
>> van deze pos. Hieronder een paar pakkende vragen en antwoorden:
>>
>> Q&A: Professor Phil Jones
>>
>> Phil Jones is director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU)
>>
>> A - Do you agree that according to the global temperature record used by
>> the
>> IPCC, the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998
>> were identical?
>>
>> An initial point to make is that in the responses to these questions I've
>> assumed that when you talk about the global temperature record, you mean
>> the
>> record that combines the estimates from land regions with those from the
>> marine regions of the world. CRU produces the land component, with the Met
>> Office Hadley Centre producing the marine component.
>>
>> Temperature data for the period 1860-1880 are more uncertain, because of
>> sparser coverage, than for later periods in the 20th Century. The
>> 1860-1880
>> period is also only 21 years in length. As for the two periods 1910-40 and
>> 1975-1998 the warming rates are not statistically significantly different
>> (see numbers below).
>>
>> I have also included the trend over the period 1975 to 2009, which has a
>> very similar trend to the period 1975-1998.
>>
>> So, in answer to the question, the warming rates for all 4 periods are
>> similar and not statistically significantly different from each other.
>>
>> Here are the trends and significances for each period:
>> Period Length Trend
>> (Degrees C per decade) Significance
>> 1860-1880 21 0.163 Yes
>> 1910-1940 31 0.15 Yes
>> 1975-1998 24 0.166 Yes
>> 1975-2009 35 0.161 Yes
>>
>> B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no
>> statistically-significant global warming
>>
>> Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to
>> 2009.
>> This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95%
>> significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance
>> level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more
>> likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.
>>
>> C - Do you agree that from January 2002 to the present there has been
>> statistically significant global cooling?
>>
>> No. This period is even shorter than 1995-2009. The trend this time is
>> negative (-0.12C per decade), but this trend is not statistically
>> significant.
>>
>> D - Do you agree that natural influences could have contributed
>> significantly to the global warming observed from 1975-1998, and, if so,
>> please could you specify each natural influence and express its radiative
>> forcing over the period in Watts per square metre.
>>
>> This area is slightly outside my area of expertise. When considering
>> changes
>> over this period we need to consider all possible factors (so human and
>> natural influences as well as natural internal variability of the climate
>> system). Natural influences (from volcanoes and the Sun) over this period
>> could have contributed to the change over this period. Volcanic influences
>> from the two large eruptions (El Chichon in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991)
>> would
>> exert a negative influence. Solar influence was about flat over this
>> period.
>> Combining only these two natural influences, therefore, we might have
>> expected some cooling over this period.
>>
>> E - How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are
>> mainly responsible?
>>
>> I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question,
>> I
>> would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the
>> warming since the 1950s is due to human activity.
>>
>>
>> G - There is a debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was
>> global
>> or not. If it were to be conclusively shown that it was a global
>> phenomenon,
>> would you accept that this would undermine the premise that mean surface
>> atmospheric temperatures during the latter part of the 20th Century were
>> unprecedented?
>>
>> There is much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in
>> extent or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North
>> America,
>> the North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia. For it to be global in
>> extent the MWP would need to be seen clearly in more records from the
>> tropical regions and the Southern Hemisphere. There are very few
>> palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.
>>
>> Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or
>> warmer
>> than today (based on an equivalent coverage over the NH and SH) then
>> obviously the late-20th century warmth would not be unprecedented. On the
>> other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less warm that today, then
>> current warmth would be unprecedented.
>>
>> We know from the instrumental temperature record that the two hemispheres
>> do
>> not always follow one another. We cannot, therefore, make the assumption
>> that temperatures in the global average will be similar to those in the
>> northern hemisphere.
>> "
>> Heb jij een nog onbeantwoorde vragen?
>> Henk Elegeert
>>
>> **********
>> Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (
>> D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
>> Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het
>> tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
>> Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het
>> tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
>> Het on-line archief is te vinden op:
>> http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
>> **********
>>
>>
>>
> **********
> Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (
> D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
> Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het
> tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
> Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het
> tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
> Het on-line archief is te vinden op:
> http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
> **********
>

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********