Der Spiegel Reports On Germany’s “Setting Sun” – The Collapse Of The Solar Industry

Countries like the USA who have been seduced by German socialists and Greens into thinking that solar energy and green energy feed-in schemes are a job creator and an engine to prosperity ought to think again. Der Spiegel reports.

 

Eastern Germany Hit Hard by Decline of Solar
By Charles Hawley

The global solar industry has entered a brutal phase of consolidation and nowhere are the effects as dramatic as in eastern Germany. Several companies have already declared bankruptcy, leaving towns and cities in the region struggling with job losses and tax revenue shortfalls. The future bodes ill.

The sun, it was said, was going to save Frankfurt an der Oder, a city of 60,000 on the Polish border. After years of post-reunification economic doldrums, whose nadir came with the 2003 failure of a much-ballyhooed microchip factory project, the burgeoning German solar industry took an interest in the down-on-its-luck city.

In 2006, solar-panel manufacturer Conergy moved into the never-used computer chip factory, joining Odersun, already headquartered in the city. In 2007, the United States solar giant First Solar opened a factory as well, followed by a second one last year.

Now, though, the future suddenly looks decidedly dark. Odersun declared bankruptcy in March and Conergy, while pledging to return to profit this year, has seen its share price lose 99.6 percent of its value in the last five years. Many doubt the company will survive. Worst of all, however, was the announcement earlier this month that First Solar was closing both of its factories in Frankfurt an der Oder; 1,200 people will soon be jobless as a result.”

Keep reading…

It is indeed strange how so little of the mainstream media is reporting on one of the greatest industrial failures ever in Germany.

Even worse, solar industry has become a huge burden on the rest of the country due to the astronomically high cost of the energy and its sporadic supply.  More on that tomorrow. What a mess.

Readers in Vermont please send the Spiegel link to your drugged-up-on-green political leaders with the slim hope it’ll sober a few up.

 

German Insurance Industry Fanning The Fears Of “Climate Change” – Takes Over At The IPCC To Cash In

The insurance industry is one of the primary beneficiaries of the climate change panic.

The more people fear climate-related disaster, the more inclined they’ll be to buy up insurance or to pay higher premiums. No industry has a a greater interest in fanning climate panic than the insurance industry. Hat-tip: a reader.

German insurance industry moves to cash in

Check out this info-ad put out by a German insurance agent in the online Norderstedt Stadtmagazin, which I’ve translated in English.

€ ‘Unpredictable weather– protect yourselves!’

Norderstedt (em/mp) storm Kyrill or the summer flood on the Elbe: Over the last years the number of extreme weather events has increased.

Many scientists trace it all back to climate change. For homeowners, these natural disasters mean damages in the billions. ‘Because of climate change we have to prepare ourselves for the increase in extreme weather events and natural catastrophes,’ insurance expert Finn Herbert knows. ‘Rain deluges, flooding, storms, hail and long-lasting cold snaps or intense snowfalls can lead to huge damage to your buildings and your personal belongings. Everyone is vulnerable. Heavy downpours can even cause flooding far away from rivers and lakes.’

A normal residential building – and a personal property insurance are not enough to protect yourself from the consequences of so-called natural perils. This can be only offered by insurance against the risks of fire, strom, hail, lightning strike, water pipes, and in personal property insurance also against breaking in and theft. ‘For the elementary perils such as flooding, water back-ups, downpours, snow loads, landslides, sinkholes, avalanches and volcanoes there is insurance against natural hazards,’ explains Finn Herbert. ‘These can be included in with your home and personal belongings insurance. Give us a call – We’ll gladly inform you.’

Ernst von der Reith GmbH”

Big Insurance penetrates the IPCC

You’ve got to wonder when scientists like Stefan Rahmstorf work hand in hand with the reinsurance industry, writing doomsday reports that help fatten the bottom line. Hartmut Grassl, a climate alarmist, is also connected to Munich Re, the world’s largest reinsurer.

Reader DirkH points out how the Munich Re has at least two more agents at the IPCC. Working Group II AR5 Writing Teams, Chapter 10 — Key economic sectors and services, Eberhard Faust, Munich Reinsurance Company and an excerpt from a report from Dr Sandra Schuster, meteorologist with Munich Re, Sydney, who has just been appointed as a Lead Author (WG2) for IPCC AR5.

It’s a real scam when the insurance industry buys up science and pays the science institutes and scientists to spread fear among its customers, stampeding them into the arms of their sales agents. Once again it’s the little guy getting the shaft.

The insurance industry oversight authorities ought to read “Die kalte Sonne – Warum die Klimakatastrophe nicht stattfindet” and start cracking down on this dubious business.

It would be interesting to know what your insurance agent says about the “increasing climate risks”. My agent doesn’t believe it, and he knows I’m not duped by the scam.

Tim McCarver Nominated For 2012 Nobel Physics Prize – McCarver’s Theory: Home Runs Correlate With CO2!

And thus he has a good shot of joining the elite ranks of Nobel Laureates along with the esteemed Al Gore and the IPCC. Hat-tip: Hot Air.

If anyone needed more evidence that climate change science has become completely irrational and idiotic, here’s another glittering jewel. It’s another sign of the spreading mental disorder that is fanned by the junk science of manmade climate change. Everything that is different today is now due to man-made climate change.

We’ve all heard the stereotype descriptions about jocks and brains. Unfortunately there are some out there who somehow find ways of setting back the debunking of such stereotypes 10 years or more. Ex-MLB player and now announcer Tim McCarver has single-handedly succeeded doing just that.

Listen to what he says concerning baseball players hitting homeruns: Click HERE.

Global warming Climate change, he theorizes on national TV, makes the air thinner and so the ball carries further when hit.

It has not been proven, but I think ultimately it will be proven that the air is thinner now. There have been climatic changes over the last 50 years in the world. I think that’s one of the reasons that balls are carrying much better now than I can remember.”

Stupid! stupid! stupid!

But wait – McCarver’s Theory may actually be true. Planes indeed today are flying further than ever per litre of jet fuel – it must must because of the “thinner air” – clear evidence that McCarver’s Theory is undeniable. The same is true for cars and trucks, which today go further than ever on a litre of fuel, again thanks to reduced air resistance from thinner air.

Furnaces are also burning more efficiently, thus indicating it must have something to do with the air. Wind speeds are faster too, thanks to thinner air making air molecules fly faster. The body of evidence is growing!

I bet if NASA, Hadley or the PIK crunched the numbers with their sophisticated models and supercomputers, McCarver’s Theory would gain a consensus among the real scientific community, Royal Academy and the National Academy of Sciences.

Concerning the homerun records, perhaps the MLB could go back and adjust the statistics. Hank Aaron could be awarded another 30 homeruns because the air back then was “thicker”, and thus take back the record he lost to Barry Bonds, who unfairly set his record in “thin air”.

Also see WUWT for more on the story.

 

The Green Wave – How Vermont Protects the Environment (Warning: Graphic Photos!)

Last fall I wrote about how self-anointed environmental mastermind politicians in my homestate of Vermont bulldozed public opposition, lots of trees and finally the top of Lowell Mountain to make way for “climate-saving” 450-foot industrial wind turbines. Read here and here.

Here’s how environmental protection by these political environmental pimps appears so far, hat-tip: energizevermont.org.

Crushed stone pad for just one turbine to be installed. Many such sites are being prepared on Lowell Mountain to accommodate a series of turbines, 21 in all.

How Vermont protects the environment – coming statewide (except Chittenden County, where the fat cats live).

Silent spring for Vermont wildlife.

The source of these photos is mountaintalk.com

VIEW ALL PHOTOS HERE

This is all “to save the planet” from the junk-science-based climate catastrophe fantasy.

How about a little prison time for the charlatans perpetuating the hoax? In a way it’s really good that I’m all the way across the big pond now.

Yes, we can thank these political whores for ruining a once beautiful area (please excuse my diplomacy). This of course is just one windpark of an entire series planned by the state.

The Green Wave

It’s just stunning how psychologically people just blindly herd behind a fad to the point where they just don’t even see the massive damage being inflicted. It’s like the story “The Wave“. It’s totally out of control. All you need are a few clever manipulators, and lots of dupes.

According to state senator Joe Benning, also a duped climate-science believer, but at least still sober enough to see the damage:

And more wind farms are coming as corporate investors, motivated by tax incentives and artificially inflated electric rates, seduce small towns with infusions of cash. Since wind is intermittent and has no storage capacity, our policy alone will require more wind farms and many miles of transmission lines to achieve our energy goal. Regulatory authorities are failing to insist on decommissioning plans, meaning our ridgelines will end up littered with forty story rusting hulks when this technology becomes obsolete. These new wind farms are encroaching on our wildlife corridors, destroying pristine mountain environments and radically changing the aesthetics of our state. They pit citizens of towns against each other, and towns against towns in a given region.”

Even if CO2 were a problem, the operation of heavy equipment, the massive earthwork and all the deforestation creates a carbon footprint that likely will never be erased – never mind the permanent disfigurement of the landscape.

Vermont’s children and grandchildren someday are going to ask: What the hell was in Vermont’s drinking water back then?

Russian Lake Vostok Scientists Say “New Ice Age Is Unavoidable”

Someone forgot to tell the Russians that natural climate factors no longer count for anything, and that from the 20th century on man-made CO2 is the sole driver of the climate – now making the Earth only warmer and warmer.

Lake Vostok under almost 4000 meters of ice in Antarctica. Source: US Government.

The German edition of Russian online daily Ria Novosti here writes how a team of Russian scientists in Antarctica has reached Lake Vostok, isolated from the rest of the world by a massive ice sheet for over 15 million years. A team of Russian scientists bored through 4000 meters of ice to reach the lake on 5 February 2012.

Minister President Vladimir Putin congratulated the researchers on their feat last Friday. Project leader Vladimir Lipenkov said that it will be very important for studying climate change on Earth. The Russian team plans to drop a robot into the lake to collect water samples and sediments from the bottom. According to Ria Novosti:

A new ice age is unavoidable, but will occur in 10,000 years at the earliest. This is what Vladimir Lipenkov, member of the Russian expedition said concerning the millions of years old Vostok Antarctic lake on Friday during a meeting with Minister President Vladimir Putin and the research team.”

Why the statements are not published in the English edition of Ria Novosti, let alone the western mainstream media, is unknown. And the report provides no information on what they base the timing of the new ice age on.

Vostok station. Photo source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

This is not the first time Russian scientists predict cooling ahead. In 2006 Chabibullo Abdussamatow of the Pulkovo Observatory and a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences said global warming had already reached its peak and that reduced solar activity would start the Earth on a cooling phase. According to Ria Novosti here:

‘With respect to solar activity, the increase in energy emission was indeed the most important event of the 20th century,’ the scientist said.”

and:

The start of the temperature decline can be expected in 2012 or 2013 according to the scientist. By 2035 or 2045 the strength of the sun will again reach a minimum. A strong cold will then grip the Earth 15 to 20 years later.

 

No Relation Found Between Cosmic Rays And Atmospheric Transmission

On Cosmic Rays and Clouds
By Ed Caryl

There have been several papers and articles recently about Svensmark’s theory that claim cosmic rays produce cloud nuclei, which in turn produce clouds that affect the Earth’s climate. My recent article showed the relationship between atmospheric transmission, the Earth’s albedo, and temperature.

Photo by Krish Dulal.

If cosmic rays produce micro-particles that grow into cloud nuclei, and if these particles are large and numerous enough to interfere with sunlight, it should be possible to show a relationship between cosmic rays and atmospheric transmission, and thus clouds.

Relationship between albedo and atmospheric transmission

The transmission is measured in a clear-sky situation. Albedo reflection is mostly from clouds. If aerosols impede transmission and aerosols ultimately produce clouds, then there should be a relationship.

Figure 1: Relationship between albedo and atmospheric transmission.

The problem with Figure 1 is that we only have a few annual data points for albedo. There isn’t a single database for global cloudiness with any temporal extent other than the above data. Two of the points are due to a volcanic eruption. Without those points only a slight relationship remains.

Figure 2: Relationship between albedo and atmospheric transmission after subtracting the two years of Pinatubo volcanic dust.

This result seems to suggest that only large dust and sulfate particles make much difference to clouds and albedo. This may explain the next result.

Figure 3: Monthly data plot of atmospheric transmission and the Oulo, Finland neutron count proxy for cosmic rays. Source of neutron data here.

The problem with this plot is that the volcanic eruptions just happened to occur at negative cycles of the neutron count. We know (or are at least fairly certain) that volcanoes and cosmic rays are not related in any way. For that reason, in the next plot, data from the two years after each volcanic eruption was deleted to avoid a false appearance of correlation.

Figure 4: Monthly data plot of atmospheric transmission versus Oulu neutron count.

Without the volcanic activity in the plot there is no relationship between atmospheric transmission and cosmic rays as measured by the neutron count at Oulu, Finland. The R-squared value is below 0.01, and in the wrong direction. The relationship is completely random.

This result does not necessarily falsify Svensmark’s theory. There may be an explanation as to why cosmic ray flux does not show up in atmospheric transmission. As suggested above, perhaps the particles are too small, or too infrequent compared to other aerosols, but it is another mystery that demands an explanation.

 

Klaus-Eckart Puls: Sea Level Rise Is Slowing Down – “There’s Going To Be No Acceleration”

Veteran meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls made a presentation on sea level at the 4th climate conference in Munich at the end of last year. The data are clear: sea level rise is slowing down.

Here are the data Puls presents:

0:35 – Not everyone is convinced sea levels will rise quickly. Qatar just built a stadium on a man-made island.

1:30 – Sea level is complex and ranges on the planet from 110 meters below and 85 meters above the average due to gravitational variations. Geophysics is the main factor in sea level, and not climate. From all the physical factors, the talk in the media is only about the relatively minor climate component.

3:40 – Global mean trend from 60°N to 60°S is 2.8 mm. (Topex, Jason 1 and Jason 2, 1993 – 2010).

4:20 – 10,000 years ago the sea level was over 100m lower than today.

5:00 – The North German sea level has risen 1.35 m over the last 400 years, i.e. 35 cm per century. But from 1900 to 2000 it rose only 25 cm – a slowdown even though CO2 and temperature increased.

5:50 – It’s not the climate that’s a catastrophe – it’s the media.

6:40 – The sea level at the North German bight measured by 14 tide gauges shows a deceleration in sea level rise, 1843-2008. German authorities “see no signs of any climatic related sea level acceleration”.

8:30 – International tide gauges also show: No acceleration in sea level rise. In fact tide gauges show a deceleration. Puls asked the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research for an answer, but they have yet to reply.

9:00 – EUMETSAT shows a deceleration over the last few years.

9:30 – “The measured data show us completely different results from the models, and that for 20 years.”

9:40 – The last two years show a distinct sea level drop.

10:30 – Envisat ESA satellite also shows a clear sea level drop since 2009.

11:10 – Puls compares tide gauge data (1.7 mm / year) and satellite measurements (3.27 mm / year). Scientists are baffled by the disagreement. Puls says, “It is obviously a measurement system problem.” Simon Holgate: “It is improbable that the sea level rise accelerated in the same year satellites began to operate.”

12:30 – John Church: It is unclear if there has been an acceleration since 1993.

12:55 – Tuvalu 1992 – 2009 data show that variations are tied to the Southern Oscillation. Moreover, Tuvalu is located on a tectonic fault and measured sea level changes there are due to tectonics, and not climate change.

16:00 – Quotes Mörner: “A 2°C warming of the upper 100 meters of the ocean would lead to only a 35 mm rise”. Thermal expansion of the ocean is completely exaggerated. It would take thousands of years to do that because to warm 1 meter of water 1°C, you need to cool 3000 meters of air 1°C.

17.20 – Quotes Trenberth: “No ocean temperature increase in the last 10 years. Moreover there seems to be a slight cooling”. Clearly if there is no ocean warming, then there can be no thermal expansion.

19:15 – Quotes Hans von Storch: “A statistical relationship between air temperature and change in sea level cannot be postulated.”

20:00 – Puls reminds us that there are still some journalists who keep saying the North Pole is melting and so the sea level is rising.

20:30 – The Antarctic is getting colder, and sea ice extent is growing. So is the thickness.

20:56 – Quotes the Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI), “A warmer climate in the Antarctic could however lead to more snowfall. The Antarctic ice sheet would tend to thicken rather than melt in the event of warming.”

21:50 – Quotes Prof. Dr. Heinz Miller of the AWI. “According to our calculated scenarios, we come to the conclusion that changes in the huge ice mass cannot contribute to sea level rise.”

22:20 – The AWI also said: “Although Greenland will likely lose ice mass, the loss of mass resulting from the melting in Greenland will be compensated by an ice gain in Antarctica.” No wonder the IPCC is continuously revised its sea level projections downwards.

23-20: Rahmstorf’s projection of 1.40 meters sea level rise by 2100 has nothing to do with reality.

23:40 – The newest panic is ocean acidification. Puls concludes: “Ocean acidification is an artifact!”

25:00 – Shows slides(in English of quotes by Nils-Axel Mörner.

27:00 – Puls concludes: “There is not going to be any acceleration of sea level”.

 

Mann’s End

Chris Horner posted a video on Facebook a few a hours ago where he reviews and brings us up to date on the efforts by the University of Virginia faculty to defy the law of the land by refusing to release taxpayer-owned documents surrounding Climategate.

There must be some something really embarrassing that needs to stay hidden, no matter the cost, as Mann and the faculty appear awfully desperate in their attempts to defy the Freedom of Information Act. Chris Horner states at the 12:18 mark:

Those people who don’t like us asking for the records have a problem with the law, and they have a problem with the University of Virginia complying.”

Mann and the faculty are applying a pressure campaign against the University in order to keep the public records under wraps. Horner:

The UVA said to us that they find themselves in a very difficult position with their faculty. And we pointed out to them that this difficult position they find themselves in is between their faculty and the law.”

And judging from Steve McIntyre’s latest post, Mann’s desperation is visible throughout his book, and reveals a person on the verge of losing it. Whenever you start getting paranoid ideas that the fossil fuel industry is and is out to get you by orchestrating a few blog sites, then you really have got to wonder. Not only has Mann run out of lies, but he is resorting to re-lying, as McIntyre points out. Mann s becoming a serious embarrassment to Jefferson’s university.

 

Radiation Balance Variables Put CO2 In The Back Seat As A Driver

By Ed Caryl

The sun supplies about 1360 watts per square meter to the Earth as seen by satellites at the top of the atmosphere. This power varies by about 1.3 watts over the 11-year solar cycle. Energy is reflected back to space by clouds and the earth’s surface. Some energy is radiated to space as infrared. Energy is radiated from the atmosphere to the surface, the so-called greenhouse effect. There is variation in all the factors that make up the radiation balance. None of the factors are fixed. CO2 may be increasing, but other factors are also changing. The albedo of the Earth varies with the amount of cloud cover, seasonal vegetation, ice, and snow. Of course the heat seen by any part of the Earth depends on the sun angle; the maximum is when the sun is directly overhead, almost none when the sun is on the horizon, none at all when the sun is below the horizon. The Earth loses heat to space by radiation, but this also varies with time of day, cloud cover, temperature, and humidity.

Water vapor accounts for 60 to 95% of the greenhouse effect. The remainder is due to CO2 and other trace gases. According to the IPCC the theoretical extra absorption by CO2 in the atmosphere if it doubled from the current amount is 4 watts per square meter. This extra absorption will be modified by clouds, cloud height, humidity, and other factors. According to the same source, the extra absorption at current levels of CO2 above the historical level is about 1 Watt. This additional energy is offset and balanced by the other outgoing factors. For an excellent explanation of the greenhouse effect see: http://www.ucar.edu/learn/1_3_1.htm.

Figure 1 shows how solar energy input is balanced by the radiated and reflected output. The 342W per square meter solar input figure is an average over the Earth’s surface that supposedly takes into account sun angle and the night and day cycle. This graphic is from Wikipedia and is seen in many publications in two versions with slightly different numbers. It originates with Kevin Trenberth et al.

One of the criticisms of this graphic is that the 342 W/m2 Back Radiation is assumed to be completely absorbed by the surface with no reflection. This would require that the surface be a perfect black-body at all wavelengths. This is obviously not the case. Another criticism is that it inadequately describes the difference in radiation conditions between night and day, and the variable influence of clouds.


Figure 1: Earth’s radiation balance according to Kevin Trenberth et al.

A third criticism is that it does not take into account the Earth’s albedo changes over time. Albedo is the percent of solar radiation that is reflected back to space by the Earth’s surface and clouds. The Earth’s albedo is measured by satellite or by looking at earthshine on the moon, the light from Earth reflected back from the lunar dark side. Here are Earth’s albedo changes from 1984 to 2004.

Figure 2, Earth’s albedo:  The red vertical bar represents the total forcing of all the greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere in the last 100 years. Using the IPCC figures, they add up to about 2.8 W/m2, about the same as the albedo variation. Clearly the albedo variability is the same as the greenhouse gas forcing, especially over any short term. The albedo change is primarily due to cloud and ice changes. Data source: Pallè et al here.

Albedo isn’t the only variable in the radiation balance graphic. The opposite of albedo (reflectance) is transmittance, the percentage of solar radiation that reaches the surface. This is also a variable, changing with the amount and kind of aerosols in the atmosphere. Since 1958 this has been measured at Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii, the same place that CO2 is measured. Their data is stated in percentage and is taken under the following conditions.

The ‘apparent’ transmission, or transmission ratio (Ellis & Pueschel, Science, 1971), is derived from broadband (0.3 to 2.8um) direct solar irradiance observations at the Mauna Loa Observatory (19.533 ° N, 155.578 ° W, elev. 3.4 km) in Hawaii. Data are for clear-sky mornings between solar elevations of 11.3 and 30 degrees.”

In the chart below the data has been converted to energy anomaly, based on the solar irradiance at the top of the atmosphere, 342 W/m2, in Figure 1 above.

Figure 3: Atmospheric transmission anomaly in terms of energy in Watts/m2.

You can see that the transmittance anomaly is quite large, even disregarding very large perturbations such as the Agung, El Chichón, and Pinatubo volcanoes. Pinatubo is also visible in the albedo data. All traces are annual averages.

Figure 4: Annual albedo and transmittance in W/m2, and global annual satellite temperature anomaly plotted together.

Because transmittance and albedo are inversely related, in the chart above, albedo (the red trace) has been inverted so that transmittance, albedo, and temperature can be related. The temperature anomaly is scaled on the right axis. The two volcanic eruptions and the last two El Niño’s can be clearly seen in the temperature. The dip in transmittance in 1963 is the Agung volcano. All three volcanic eruptions were sulfur-rich and pushed gasses and dust into the stratosphere.

What about greenhouse gases?

Figure 5: Greenhouse gas forcing since 1978.The scale is also in W/m2. Source.

Figure 5 uses the IPCC figures for greenhouse gas forcing, 4°C for CO2 doubling, which may overstate the numbers. CO2 and methane (CH4) dominate the total. But let us plot the total greenhouse gas forcing (the top trace in Figure 5) on the Figure 4 graph.

Figure 6: Albedo, greenhouse gases, transmittance, and TSI anomalies plotted together with the Global Satellite Temperature anomaly. The transmittance linear trend line is also included. The vertical scale has been changed, truncating the large negative transmittance spikes, so that the smaller forcings can be seen.

The TSI anomaly has been added to Figure 6 along with the greenhouse gas trace. Note that the transmittance trend is in the opposite direction of the greenhouse gases, and is of similar magnitude.

It is clear that aerosols, albedo, and ocean cycles are very largely what drive global temperature in the short term. Carbon dioxide is a minor player. TSI (total solar irradiance) plays very little direct role on this time scale. If the sun has an effect it must be via some other mechanisms.

Because we know so little with certainty about water vapor, it has been left out of this analysis. Water vapor is a very important greenhouse gas, by some accounts resulting in 60 to 95% of the greenhouse effect. The problem is that because water exists in all three phases in the atmosphere, and convection, evaporation, condensation, and precipitation produces wildly variable amounts at different altitudes, times, and locations, calculating the resulting forcing is very problematic. In general, water vapor tracks temperature. In the lower troposphere, this has meant that water vapor is increasing along with temperature. Some have stated that this results in positive feedback further increasing temperature. But in the stratosphere, the temperature has been decreasing, and so has the water vapor content. (See discussions here and here.) This allows increased radiation to space. As a result, others have argued that this results in negative feedback. It may well be that the two variabilities cancel.

Among the variables that control climate change, atmospheric transmission is by far the largest factor. Even in the absence of volcanic activity, upper atmosphere aerosols vary on a scale that dwarfs the other factors. Ocean cycles are next in importance. Third in importance is albedo. The reflection of clouds, ice, smoke, land and sea surfaces are continuously changing. Fourth on the list are the greenhouse gases excluding water vapor. The big unknown variable is water vapor. We know it is varying. To some extent we even know how much. What we don’t know is what forcing water vapor provides. We don’t even know where water vapor ranks on this list.

 

The German Energy Blog And 50Hz Sites

I’d like to recommend the German Energy Blog to readers who’d like to know the latest about German energy news and issues. You may want to bookmark it.

German Energy Blog

Their latest article presents a resource called 50Hz:

Friday last week 50Hertz Transmission GmbH, the transmission system operator (TSO) whose grid covers large parts of Eastern and Northern Germany, started publishing the load flow data for its grid on the internet. It is the first TSO in Germany to do so.

Visitors of the web pages shall find an up-to-date map of the grid showing all power lines and interconnectors with other transmission grids. Network conditions shall be shown for the full hour. For a better understanding the lines shall be coloured depending on the specific load flow. Upon clicking on a power line, the load shall be given in megawatt (MW). The information is supplemented by data regarding special measures to secure system stability, i.e. …” (Continue reading)

It would be nice if all grid operators offered this service.

Especially the 50HZ Grid Data page offers up-to-date, interesting data on energy feed-in, etc.. For example here is photovoltaic feed-in for the last 24 hours:

Source: http://www.50hertz.com/en/2805.htm.

 

Outbreak Of Poisonous Oak Processionary Caterpillar Blamed On Climate Change (Even Though There’s No Data)

The German media are reporting on a developing outbreak of the oak processionary caterpillar now spreading over the Eastern and Southern areas of Germany.

The caterpillars are pests in oak forests and they pose a health hazard because of their poisonous hairs which can cause skin irritation and asthma. Quite the nasty critter, indeed.

German daily Die Welt reports that the dangerous caterpillar develops especially well in warm and dry springs, adding:

Also climate change has likely contributed to the spread of the pest.”

Even though they don’t cite any information or data to back it up. I suspect they got their information from Wikipedia, who write:

The moths are widely distributed in central and southern Europe, and are occasionally found as far north as Sweden. In the southern countries of Europe the populations are controlled by natural predators, but these predators do not exist in northern Europe. Their range is expanding northward, possibly or partly as a result of global warming [clarification needed, citation needed]. The moths are posing an increasing threat to humans as their range is being extended by the warming European climate.[citation needed]. The backs of older caterpillars (3rd to 6th instars) are covered with up to 63,000 pointed defensive bristles containing an urticating toxin (thaumetopoein or closely related compounds). The setae break off readily, become airborne and can cause epidemic caterpillar dermatitis (lepidopterism), manifested as a papular rash, pruritus, conjunctivitis and, if inhaled, pharyngitis and respiratory distress, including asthma or even anaphylaxis.”

The oak processionary caterpillar has spread during other years as well.

Read more here.

Killer Offshore Windparks – 3 Dead, 80 Serious Accidents “…More Have Died”

In terms of deaths, this is worse than Fukushima.

Yet, we never hear a peep from the media about the dark side of this “safe and environmentally gentle energy”. Imagine if this had happened at a nuclear power plant.

“Building offshore wind parks can be a deadly occupation. Three construction workers have already drowned whilst working on German projects in the North and Baltic Seas. 80 serious accidents have been registered, it was reported Sunday.

A total of three men, including a Polish worker and a Swedish diver have already lost their lives whilst working on offshore wind farms 120 kilometres off the East Frisian coast near Emden, reported the online edition of the Focus magazine on Sunday.

Both workers drowned while working on the BardOffshore wind farm.

Leader of the German Central Command for Maritime Emergencies Hans Werner Monsees told the magazine that only “a better and tighter rescue system” would prevent the number of deaths…” Continue reading…

Original story in FOCUS here, which adds (emphasis added):

The energy transition has had deadly consequences: According to FOCUS information, there have already been 80 serious accidents on German offshore wind park construction sites. Three men have been killed – and more have died.

More have died? How many? Seems nobody wants to tell us.

Of course any construction site is hazardous and deaths are inevitable. But what irks me is that for one industry it’s acceptable, but not for another (e.g. nuclear).

NoTricksZone Goes Green

Although under normal conditions it makes no economic or scientific sense to install solar panels way up here at 53° north latitude in somber northern Germany, generous subsidies make it risk-free. So either you jump through the hoop and take the money, or you pay through the nose.

I have to make a confession – our home, which is home to NoTricksZone, was outfitted with solar panels in late March.

Our home is ideally situated and so we decided to put 12 KW of rated capacity on our home. Our decision has nothing to do with the nonsense of “protecting the climate”. A customer of ours installs these systems on the side, and so I thought, what the heck. One hand washes the other. And like Dave Suzuki says: “Hey man, it’s for free!”

The entire system is financed by a low-interest loan and will start to pay back in about 10 years, using conservative figures. Without the subsidies, that period would be closer to 30, i.e. way beyond the lifetime of the panels.

There are lots of open issues, of course. What happens if the system has a problem and the manufacturer has gone bust, as many already have? In Germany there are hundreds of thousands of systems already installed. What about disposal and recycling of the panels 20 years down the road at the end of their lifetime? Our panels are from Sharp and current converter is from SMA.

Workmen preparing the roof.

The installation company is run by a real tinkerer, and he’s working on some ideas. The technology still has potential for improvement. Unfortunately the subsidies killed all the incentive to develop the technology. Development is expensive, and why do it if you can make money without it?

The installation is just about complete, and the power utility company will be hooking it up soon.

My apologies to German skeptic readers who now will have to pay for my expensive green electricity. :)

The Great Green German Solar Depression – Green Revolution Brings Massive Layoffs

Warmist site Klimaretter (Climate Rescuer) here brings us the news that yet another German solar company is going under, and with it taking down hundreds of “future” jobs.

We should note that like the solar industry, the warmist movement is also hurting financially. For example, Klimaretter is now begging its readers for money and donations. So if you have any loose change in your pocket…

Please understand they don’t have the luxury of the fossil fuels industry sending them millions and millions like us skeptic sites do –  sarc off.

Personally I don’t know what these crybabies want. Us skeptic sites do what they do because we feel it’s the right thing to do, and not for money.

The latest news is that US photovoltaic company First Solar is pulling completely out of Germany, check it out here. I’m sure everyone has already heard and read this news everywhere in the mainstream media, right? Not really.

First Solar was the third largest solar energy company in the world behind China’s JA Solar and Suntech.

So what happened? Mike Ahearn, Chairman and Interim CEO of First Solar:

It is clear the European market has deteriorated to the extent that our operations there are no longer economically sustainable, and maintaining those operations is not in the best long-term interest of our stakeholders.”

First Solar will shut down its plant in Frankfurt (Oder) and cost the economically depressed region 1200 jobs by the end of the year – a massive blow because the company was by far the region’s largest employer. The plant was opened barely 5 years ago amid much hoopla and proclamations of how it was the industry of the future. Klimaretter writes that at the time, everyone heard comments like:

Establishing First Solar at Frankfurt (Oder) is a prime example of successful climate protection and economic policy in Germany.”

Now, less than 60 months later, not only will the company close its solar plant in Frankfurt (Oder), but also its sales HQ in Mainz, costing another 150 jobs. The people who gave us these promises of “jobs for the future” are the same who insist that the projections of climate models can also be taken to the bank.

First Solar follows an entire series of solar industry collapses in Germany, led by Solon, Solar Millennium, Q-Cells, and Solarhybrid, to name a few. Call it Merkel’s Miracle.

In total, the tens of billions of euros in subsidies have produced only massive economic misery and dashed dreams – and forget about changing the global climate. First Solar is a prime example result of a scientific farce.

 

European Big Brother: CarbonSat Surveillance Satellite Aims “To Hunt Down Climate Violators” GLOBALLY By 2017!

One of the big problems with emissions reduction treaties like Kyoto is how to enforce them. Sure countries can pledge to make cuts, but how can you be sure they won’t cheat? It turns out that Europe is working on that.

German warmist website CO2 Handel here tells us how Europe intends to make sure the rest of the world complies fully to climate treaties: Human society will be reduced to color pixels and be constantly watched by a satellite launched and run by climate Eurocrats in Brussels. Carbon Big Brother is coming.

According to CO2 Handel (Astrium EADS press release here in English):

Aerospace company Astrium is designing a new satellite for the European Space Agency (ESA) to be used for monitoring greenhouse gas occurrences. The new climate satellite will be able to detect greenhouse gases with an unprecedented spatial resolution: 2 x 2 kilometers. The European Space Agency wants to hunt down environmental and climate violators with its new satellite. Aerospace company Astrium will put together a feasibility study for the project by the end of 2013, according to company reports Thursday. If things move forward successfully, the mission – dubbed CarbonSat – could already begin as soon as 2017 and thus enable monitoring of international climate treaties.”

Now if anyone ever needed a compelling reason not to sign the treaty, this is it. Signatories will have to subject their territories to a constant invasion of privacy. Who knows what else they may want to monitor later on? Where does it end?

According to CO2 Handel, CarbonSat would monitor mainly the two climate gases CO2 and methane, and with “an unprecedented accuracy.”

For the first time it would be possible to record local CO2 sources such as coal power plants, emissions from cities or also geological sources like volcanoes. Other similar possibilities include detecting methane, says the company, for example from landfills and oil processing industrial complexes.”

By cities they mean private commuters (collectively). Imagine local political leaders demanding more transportation restrictions in cities – all because satellite pixels from ESA suggest people are driving too much. Or, farm operations will encounter the heavy hand of bureaucracy because of “excessive” cow emissions, or fertilizer use. Does the whole planet really need to be kept under constant surveillance by a European eco-Big Brother?

If you think that’s scary, listen to how they justify this highly intrusive surveillance system. CO2 Handel here writes:

‘Knowledge of both of these gases is not only decisive for climate forecasts, but also for monitoring international climate treaties,’ emphasized Astrium-Germany Evert Dudok in an interview with the German Press Agency (dpa). Up to now there has been no reliable way of monitoring the implementation of the Kyoto and Copenhagen treaties. ‘The target is to hunt down environmental violators,’ said Dudok.”

At first the Astrium press release here in English makes it sound like they need the data to refine the climate models. But notice how Dudok reveals the true intentions of the technology: global surveillance.

And it all boils down to the myth that climate is controlled by trace gases CO2 and methane, and so man has got to be constantly monitored and regulated. Orwell’s 1984 – just 33 years later – brought to you by catastrophe-obsessed Europe.

The project will be led by German Friedrichshafen-based Astrium Company near Lake Constance.
Astrium press release here in English

Veteran Meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls: “99% Of Antarctica Is Cooling – PIK Obsessed With Catastrophe”

 Veteran meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls at the European Institute For Climate and Energy (EIKE) presents an analysis of Antarctica.
==================================

Climate Panic Orchestra Now Playing In Antarctica
by Klaus Eckart Puls
(Translated/edited by P Gosselin)

Now that we are at the Antarctic late summer and autumn (February-April), extensive calving of the ice sheets have been occurring along the Shelf-Ice belt [1a], as it has been for thousands of years. As usual, the (German!) media is now pouncing on the opportunity to announce that anthropogenic global warming (AGW), and with it the climate catastrophe, has reached the South Pole region.

However, a simple fact-check reveals that this claim is simply untrue: Antarctica is cooling and the ice belt is growing!

Antarctica is melting?

The ever catastrophe-obsessed Potsdam Institute For Climate Impact Research (PIK) [1] announced: “Scientists of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research consider it possible that the climate system of the the West Antarctic may have tipped and that ice melt will be unstoppable.

Recently, DER SPIEGEL [2] wrote: “The results of the European Space Agency ESA are alarming: The Larsen-B ice shelf in Antarctica has lost three quarters of its ice area. The Envisat satellite has observed this.” Responsible for the melting is global warming.”

First off, satellite data should not be doubted.

Everything else concerning the subject of climate in the media is simply mixing of half-truths, ignoring of contradictory facts, twisting of facts, and emotionally charged fear and panic mongering.

With this type of deficient communication, factual information would surely benefit the reader – especially those less familiar with natural sciences. So we present the following points to add a more focused perspective.

(1) The Antarctic peninsula is about 1% of the total Antarctic area.
(2) The so-called LARSEN-B and WILKINS area [2] measures in the range of mere thousandths when it concerns the entire Antarctic area, see Figure 1.


Figure 1: Antarctic ice shelf [3]

(3) 99% of the Antarctic region is showing a cooling temperature trend [4].

(4) Even the constantly claimed warming trend on the Antarctic peninsula, including LARSEN and WILKINS ice shelves, cannot be detected using current evaluations [5]. See a recent NoTricksZone post: “It’s The Claim “Antarctica Is Warming” That Is Disintegrating – And Not Much Else“:

Figure 2: Temperature development Larsen Ice Shelf (NASA GISS) [5]

A warming of 2.5°C over the last 50 years is nowhere to be found. And any warming that did occur, did so without exception before 1980. Taking this into account, attributing the break-up of the Larsen Ice Shelf to global warming is already quite adventurous, to put it mildly.”

(5) The entire Antarctic ice area is as a whole growing in size [5].

(6) The reason for the break-up of ice in the areas of LARSEN-B + WILKINS is in no way due to warming as suggested by the SPIEGEL article [2]” because there simply isn’t any over Antarctica. See footnote [4]:

Almost all of Antarctica has gotten colder over the last 30 years. The only exception is the Antarctic peninsula. This is due to meteorological reasons: The Antarctic peninsula is in the west-winds zone of the southern hemisphere. This southern hemisphere west-wind belt is subject to stochastic cyclic atmospheric pressure fluctuations, as is the case for all other global wind systems. Here, analog to the atmospheric fluctuations of the middle latitudes of the northern hemisphere known as the North Atlantic Oscillation NAO, the Antarctic Oscillation Index AAO is calculated.”

Figure 3: AAO indices [4]

The course of the AAO-Index from 1948 to 2002 is shown in Figure 3. Before about 1980 there was a dominance of meridional weather systems. Since then zonal weather systems have overwhelmingly predominated. This means there’s been a strengthening of the west-wind circulation and thus storm activity. At the same time more mild air from the Pacific gets fed into the Antarctic peninsula. Thus storms with warm air contribute to more ice melting on the Antarctic peninsula, along with high waves which mechanically break up the ice at a faster rate. Examples in the recent times are the ice breaks (icebergs) at the Wilkins Ice Shelf at the west coast of the Antarctic peninsula.”

Thus the causes are meteorological, and they have nothing to do with any kind of “climate catastrophe”.

Klaus-Eckart Puls, EIKE

Sources:

[1a]  Eisberg voraus; http://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/publikationen/klaus-puls-dipl-meteorologe/puls-publikation/eisberg-voraus-weltuntergang-auch/
[1]  www.pnn.de/campus/549280/
[2]  SPON: 10.04.2012, Satellit dokumentiert zehn Jahre Eisschmelze; http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/0,1518,826669,00.html
[3]  WIKIPEDIA; http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schelfeis
[4]   http://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/news-cache/klima-kaelte-trend-in-der-antarktis/
[5]  http://notrickszone.com/2012/04/12/its-the-claim-antarctica-is-warming-that-is-disintegrating-and-not-much-else/

[6] http://notrickszone.com/2010/11/10/a-wind-in-antarctica/

 

More Reconstructions Show Climate Is Natural (And That IPCC Climate Models Are Rubbish)

 Die kalte Sonne website, which is now one of Germany’s most widely read and respected climate science sites, presents two more articles on temperature reconstructions below. The reconstructions are just the latest in a long, growing series of temperature reconstructions globally.

They all have two things in common: 1) almost all show wide temperature variations in sync with solar activity (note here I write “activity” and not “irradiance”, and it sure would be nice if warmist scientists some day learned the difference) and 2) they all disagree with the IPCC CO2-centric computer simulations.

Which one should we believe? Models written by end-of-world physicists or the real, measured data gathered by geoscience experts? Duh! That’s a tough one!
(Click here for some advice to modellers who think they can model the universe from within the confines of their air-conditioned offices.)

What follows are two short essays from Die kalte Sonne website:

No. 1
Sun Beneath the Earth: Solar Activity Cycles in Tropical Caves Are Revealed
Translated by P Gosselin

A Danish team of scientists led by geoscientist Mads Faurschou Knudsen of the University of Aarhus published a study on the climate impact of solar activity fluctuations in the sub tropics in the journal The Holocene. The group studied how four stalactites in caves in China, Turkey and the USA archived the climate over the last 10,000 years. Using oxygen isotopes, the scientists reconstructed the moisture development at these locations, whereby the corresponding delta-18O-values reflected monsoon intensity.

Applying frequency analysis, the scientists could show characteristic cycles in the monsoon history in the regions of study that follow the known 210-year Suess/de Vries solar cycle. The authors conclude:

The temporal relationship between the Suess solar cycle and particularly significant 210 yr oscillations in the speleothem δ18O records therefore supports the notion that solar variability played a significant role in driving centennial-scale changes in the hydrological cycle in the subtropics during the Holocene.“

Additional suggested reading: Mangini’s-curves-stark-natural-climate-fluctuations-over-last-8000-years/.
Thanks to MC for research help.

 

No. 2 New Finnish Study Confirms Coupling Between Sun and NAO, NAO and Temperature

Translated/edited by P. Gosselin

Global and regional temperature development is impacted by numerous climate factors. A reliable quantitative weighting of the various natural and anthropogenic processes is, despite what the IPCC likes to have us believe – still not possible. Finnish scientists Samuli Helama and Jari Holopainen have investigated and checked the springtime temperature development over the last 260 years for southwest Finland for a statistical correlation to see if there are signs of solar activity cycles and ocean cycles being involved.

Their study appeared recently in the renown geosciences journal Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology.

The scientists found that the temperature is strongly coupled to the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), which represents the atmospheric pressure difference between Icelandic lows and Azores highs. It concerns foremost the last 160 years, as the barometric pressure measurements for reconstructing the NAO for the time before 1850 are possibly not reliable, the authors write.

The scientists took it a step further and asked themselves what actually could be driving the NAO? And they discovered something surprising. Over long periods during the 20th century they found a statistically significant correlation between solar sunspot activity and the NAO Index. The correlations improved when the time intervals were viewed on decadal scales and the data filtered accordingly. A significant impact on the NAO by the sun has also already been shown by other studies as well.

After Helama and Holopainen were able to show good agreement between sunspots and the NAO, as well as the NAO and the temperature for their southwest region of investigation, they checked the direct relation between solar activity and temperature. Here it turned out there was only a correlation for part of the time, and there were longer periods that were not statistically coupled.

How can this be explained? Climate is a very complex product of multiple, interacting factors. A direct correlation between solar activity and temperature development is thus something that just cannot be expected. The scientists suspect that the sun as the primary pulse generator also possibly causes internal climate cycles that are superimposed on the solar signal. The NAO here could act as a sort of intermediator between the solar activity fluctuations and the Earth’s climate.

Other factors that could adversely impact the correlation between the sun and temperature include time lags in the transposition of a climate impulse, or cooling events through sun-blocking aerosols from large volcanic eruptions. Moreover in needs to be checked if the correlation improves when one checks the development of cosmic rays (instead of sunspots) with temperature.

The study makes an important contribution to the puzzle in understanding the interaction between the sun, ocean cycles and temperature development. Research in this area needs to be intensified.

 

Max Planck Institute Director Admits “Physical Causes Unclear…Models Inconsistent With Observations”!

More cracks like never before are appearing in Germany’s climate alarmism.

Not long ago global warming science was considered settled here. So much so that climate protection has long since been institutionalized. Now it’s all starting to look like a very expensive mistake. The threat of a spectacular crumble is becoming real.

Michael Odenwald of warmist news magazine FOCUS has written a status report on global warming science: “Global Warming: “A Matter of Standpoint”.

As the title suggests, the dispute depends on how one looks at the data, and so the science is becoming more unsettled than ever. German media is beginning to report on the growing number of contradictions.

David Whitehouse: Time to recognize the temperature stagnation

As Odendahl describes, the big dispute raging today is whether global warming is continuing, or if it has stalled. According to HadCRUT4, global temperature has remained constant from 1997 to 2011. FOCUS writes:

However, [David] Whitehouse explains further, the IPCC had predicted a temperature increase of of 0.2°C per decade because of the anthropogenic greenhouse effect. But this warming has not occurred. ‘We are now at a point where temperature stagnation is dominating the climate development. One cannot ignore that, even if is not 30 years,’ Whitehouse believes. ‘It is now time for the IPCC and the scientific community to recognize the temperature stagnation as reality.“

FOCUS author Odendahl then adds:

With this, it is becoming very clear that the scientific debate over the greenhouse effect is not yet over.

David Whitehouse’s argument points to the failure of climate models to make predictions of any value.

Marotzke: Models have not been consistent with observations

FOCUS consulted Jochem Marotzke, Director of the warmist Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg concerning the reliability of climate models. To his credit, Marotzke admitted that the models aren’t what they are cracked up to be, and that the science is far from clear. FOCUS (emphasis added):

Whitehouse points out that climate simulations, like those carried out at the Hadley Climate Research Unit, indeed show periods of stagnation lasting up to a decade. In the models they occur about every 80 years. However, none of the simulations up to now have shown a pause of 15 years. Also the models that run on the super-computers of the Hamburg Climate Research Centre also show such plateau phases. ‘The physical causes are still unclear, and our simulations show them occurring at other times. Thus the models are not consistent with the current observations.’ admits Jochem Marotzke, Director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg.”

So clearly the models are wrong, and what does not work in the present cannot be counted on to work for the future. Garbage now, garbage later.

Rahmstorf: There’s a warming trend – if you ignore factors

With one side claiming that warming has stalled, FOCUS reminds us that there are still some scientists who still insist warming is continuing, like Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK). Here he’s caught making another one of his famous Rahmstorfian climate-speak statements. FOCUS writes:

According to PIK scientist Rahmstorf, global warming continues. ‘If you deduct the known short-term fluctuations from volcanoes, solar cycles and El Niño, then there’s been a warming over the last 30 years of 0.16° Celsius per decade, which is precisely in the middle of the IPCC projections“, Rahmstorf explains.

Firstly, would someone please nominate this as the Quote of the Week at WUWT? Of course you can get any trend you want by ignoring whatever you want.

Secondly, 0.16° temperature increase per decade is not in the middle of the IPCC’s projected range of 1.9°C to 4.5°C by 2100. Rahmstorf struggles with the truth – again!

 

Major Face Palm! New Satellite Measurements Show HIMALAYAN GLACIERS ARE GROWING!

German flagship news magazine Der Spiegel reports here on new satellite measurements of Himalayan glaciers. Not long ago IPCC scientists, among them Prof. Hans-Joachim Schellnhuber and train engineer Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, claimed with grave tones that the Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2030.

Hat-tip: a NTZ reader.

That, among other errors, fantasies and exaggerations, turned out to be a hugely embarrassing blunder for the IPCC stemming from one of the many bedwetting environmental activists who have long since infiltrated and compromised the IPCC process.

Spiegel starts with:

Surprise: The ice sheets of the Karakorum range in the Himalayas grew over the period from 2000 to 2008. The thickness over the period increased by more than ten centimeters. […] The glaciers of the world are shrinking faster and faster – that’s what many scientists tell us. However there are exceptions – and not only in Antarctica, but also in the Himalayas.”

Forget melting rapidly. It turns out that the Himalayan range is not even melting slowly. In fact it’s not melting at all! Indeed according to new satellite measurements they are growing. The once global warming is obviously becoming more and more local.

According to the abstract of the study conducted by French scientists Julie Gardelle, Etienne Berthier, and Yves Arnaud, published in Nature Geosciences here:

The regional mass balance is just positive at +0.11±0.22 m yr water equivalent and in agreement with the observed reduction of river runoff that originates in this area. Our measurements confirm an anomalous mass balance in the Karakoram region and indicate that the contribution of Karakoram glaciers to sea-level rise was −0.01 mm/yr for the period from 1999 to 2008, 0.05 mm yr lower than suggested before.”

Melting, we were told, was supposed to threaten the local water supply. Instead we now see that it is the lack of melting that is the real threat. Der Spiegel adds:

The first measurements were recorded by the US shuttle ‘Endeavour’ in February 2000 . The French satellite ‘SPOT5′ delivered the second set of data in 2008. The glacier comparison yielded a clear result: The thickness of the ice grew by more than 10 cm over the period.”

And reminds us:

Many of the ice sheets globally are shrinking, however they are melting more slowly than previously thought, as galciologists found out in February. On the poles the glaciers are more stable than in the early years; in the high mountains outside of Antarctica and Greenland, they are melting only half as fast as first thought.”

Finally, no model simulations up to now confirming that the Himalayan glacier growth is due to the accelerating global warming.

And there’s still no indication from the end-of-world modelers at various climate institutes that they are insisting that the real measurements must be faulty because their fined-tuned models are correct and superior.

Veteran German Meteorologist: “Nature Journal Has Become A Comic Book”…Climate Modeling A Playground

There has been a rash of dubious papers published lately. Many of us suspect that the IPCC is desperate for science that can serve to prop up the ailing global warming science of its upcoming 5th assessment report.

The most recent include papers by Jeremy Shakun et al, who attempt to put CO2 back into the driver’s seat as the climate driver, and by Gerrit Lohmann et al, who hint that dozens of tediously produced temperature reconstructions from proxies may be false because they don’t agree with a simplistic model made by physicists and mathematicians who have very limited or no knowledge of geo-sciences.

German veteran meteorologist Dr. Wolfgang Thüne writes his reaction to the quality of these papers in a commentary posted at the European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) site here.

Thüne, a leading skeptic of the AGW theory in Germany, is not known for mincing words.

In  summary, he attacks today’s climate science, comparing the climate science and modeling community to children in a sandbox playing tip-the-bucket. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber and Stefan Rahmstorf proposed the tipping-point back in 2007: Tipping elements in the Earth’s climate system. Since then, climate scientists have spent much time fantasizing about end-of-world tipping scenarios. Thüne writes:

It’s fun playing tip-the-bucket to see what force is needed to reach the balancing point and then tip it over. It’s also a favorite game among children to try to knock each other off balance with sudden shoves.

Experts all over the globe have taken up these child’s games, and are now trying bring the Earth out of balance. But because this cannot be done with the real Earth, they’ve moved the game to the computer where the Earth does what it is commanded. With climate models one can bring about the end of the world, and at the same time have a little fun in an otherwise staid science scene. You can get your kicks out of it, generate lots of research funding, and keep the world in suspense through the media. This is what two science teams in the USA have done, and have published their fun-and-games in ‘Nature’, a publication that has long since stopped being a scientific journal and has become a comic book for climate junkies. Allowed to publish there are only those who play by the rules and profess the guiding theme, which is: ‘Lies and deceit are the integral components of science’!”

No mincing words here. In fact Thüne says of both publications from the science teams of Harvard University in Cambridge and the University of Massachusetts in Amherst:

They so primitively and grossly lie that it can be perceived as an insult to normal common sense. 55 million years ago and then again 18,000 years ago phantoms with an invisible hand threw the Earth off its orbit. The Earth began to teeter so that first Antarctica and then the Arctic warmed. Especially in the ‘South Pole regions humongous amounts of carbon were released’ which then triggered a ‘heat shock’. Also today ‘changes in the Earth’s orbit’ could have similar consequences and precipitate ‘a run-away warming’. Isn’t that just frighteningly awful?”

Climate scientists are really mathematicians and physicists who are much like bored kids in a sandbox armed with computers and reality-detached models. This playground, Thüne writes, is all thanks to governments who shower funding on this “kind of pseudo-science, and then misuse it.”

Politics and science work very closely together in a game that is increasingly about money and power. […] This is indeed a scandal. It is a political scandal. […] It is time to get back to reality, to the weather, and to not waste our intellectual and material energies on proving the chimera that is the “climate catastrophe. We would be much better off focusing on how to protect ourselves from the weather.”

Finally, Thüne cites some examples of “wasted intellectual and material energies”:
Shakun on our wobbly world’s precession, ocean CO2 fizzing, the last ice age, and all that
Did Shakun et al. really prove that CO2 preceded late glacial warming? [Part 1]
Shakun Redux: Master tricksed us! I told you he was tricksy!
Does CO2 correlate with temperature history? – A look at multiple timescales in the context of the Shakun et al. paper