Skeptic Climate Conference Day 1


This was the first day that I got to meet any of the people that have been involved in the skeptic side of the global warming debate.  Just from that perspective it was an interesting day.  There are many very smart and capable people here that know a great deal about the Earth’s climate.  Many scientists from around the world were willing to pay for their trip here to discuss the science of the global warming debate.  Some of these people have been involved in the debate for a very long time and have seen funding dry up as a direct result of the conclusions they reached about global warming.  It has been good to meet all of them, even if some of them have ideas that I do not support.

Here is a quick summary of the speakers from Day 1.  This doesn’t include the meal speakers.

Nir Shaviv PhD,  discussed the basic premise behind global warming to provide context to the climate sensitivity issue.  He then showed a parameter optimized chart of the warming of the 20th century to determine a relatively low climate sensitivity.  The most interesting thing to me was a tide guage rate of rise shown against the sunspot cycle.  I personally remains skeptical that the sunspot cycle plays a very significant role, but there are some interesting correlations that make me curious.  His was one of them.

Howard Hayden PhD,  had a very interesting discussion where he showed in a straight forward manner than the temperature and CO2 rise of the 20th century were tightly correlated, which I agree with.  Then he most aptly demonstrated the simple fact that the correlation is exactly what would be expected for CO2 outgassing from increasing water temperatures.  It was a much better example of the topic I discussed here.

Don Easterbrook PhD, is one of the people that has been involved in the debate for some time.  He discussed the predictions made in 2000 by himself and the IPCC.  Since there was been no significant warming since 1998 it is pretty clear that his prediction of no warming was more accurate than the rapid warming predicated by the IPCC.  He is a proponent of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) being the cause of warming.  I agree with that, but it doesn’t explain what causes the PDO.

Panel 2:  John Dunn M.D., Jerry Arnett M.D., Paul Driessen: Discussed the benefits of warming compared to cooling.  Many points about deaths in cold waves vs. heat waves.  I agree with this, but it isn’t my area.

Todd Wynn, Economist. I will put together a full article just on his presentation, but he went into details of just how much money and energy are being wasted as a result of the global warming paranoia.  It is rather terrifying.  He had many charts showing how all pollution emissions in the United States have been decreasing for decades, but the new regulations will have a large impact on the price of energy.  See more at:  http://www.alec.org/publications/epas-regulatory-train-wreck-2/

Craig Idso, PhD, had an interesting presentation about his research into the impact of dropping pH levels on sea life.  He noted that most studies show that sea life is very adaptable to differing pH levels.  He showed that only by really cranking down the pH can life run into real problems, but that it was impossible to drop the pH that much.  I also got a chance to speak to him afterwards and I showed him my article on acidification.  He had not seen the global maps of pH and carbon concentration before and told me to talk to To Wysmuller about it.  Since he will speak today I will have a follow up on that then.

Craig Loehle, Ph.D. –  Showed the impact of higher CO2 on plant growth.  Straight up it is better for plants to have more CO2 than less CO2.  Since it is likely that the rainforests were mostly reduced by low CO2 and not lack of moisture, this is not a surprise.

Patrick Michaels, Ph.D. –  Was mostly discussing the method that the EPA is going to regulate CO2, mostly by an endangerment finding that shows the impact to the United States that they predict will happen as a result of global warming.  He went through it point by point destroying the endangerment finding about pointing out the contradictions even within their own document.  It would be amusing if it wasn’t so terrifying.

I am out of time to finish up, but will update it later with the rest of the first day.

The Inconvenient Skeptic

Craig Idso at the ICCC

——————————–Update————————————–

William Gray, Ph.D, Stanley Goldenberg, Anthony Lupo, Ph.D

Dr. Gray was the only person that focused on the energy balance to any significant degree.  For me this is the most important part of the scientific debate.  If a change in the CO2 concentration can have a significant impact on the energy balance it matters, if it can’t, it doesn’t.  I would have liked to spent more time with Dr. Gray to discuss this, but that didn’t happen.  It is clear that he and I agree that CO2 cannot have a significant impact on the energy balance.

The last two panelists spent time discussing hurricanes and extreme weather events.  The hurricane issue should be a dead one as all the latest research and data show that hurricane activity is at an all time low.  This was an easy discussion as a result.  Since Joe Bastardi had at breakfast really delved into the monster hurricanes from earlier in the century it was clear that hurricanes haven’t been especially numerous or powerful in the past 30 years.

Dr. Lupo finished off with the extreme weather.  He discussed from a meteorological point of view about why the Russian heat wave of 2010 was not caused by global warming as well as covering the very warm spring that the central USA had this year.  The main note that I had was that the spring of 1896 was even warmer than the one this year.

Overall the first day was an interesting one and I did pick up some new information.

Posted in ICCC by inconvenientskeptic on May 22nd, 2012 at 6:06 am.

3 comments

This post has 3 comments

  1. Would the PDO cause certain months to be cold?

    I’ve been looking at Environment Canada data for BC. They have a set of stations that have values that are the “Departure From 1971-2000”

    April in BC in 2009 and 2011 were about 1.7C colder than the long term mean.

    Not only that, but they were 5C colder than 1934.

    The big plunge started around 2004.

    I know April 2012 bounced back to be normal in the US, but you can see the same thing in Washington States data.

    April 2008 and 2011 were 12F colder than 1934. And 5F colder than the long term mean.

    2011 was the 2nd coldest April ever. And 2008 was the tied for 3rd coldest.

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/wa.html

    Oregon April was almost as cold … 5th and 6th.

    In California, the last warm April was 2004. 2005 and later were cold, but not quite as dramatic.

  2. Eric Anderson May 22nd 2012

    Sounds like a very interesting conference. Too bad Heartland pulled the PR stunt they did, resulting in a few presenters not attending. Any discussion or acknowledgment of that?

    Despite the PR flap, sounds like you’ve heard some interesting presentations and, perhaps more importantly, gotten to meet some interesting people.

    I’m glad you are able to attend. Must be all the $ flowing in from your book sales! 🙂

  3. inconvenientskeptic May 22nd 2012

    Hehe. There are have been numerous jokes at Heartlands expense about that. This is not really a group that holds back their thoughts.

Web Design & Dev by

Mazal Simantov Digital Creativity