Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.


Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Donate

Twitter Facebook YouTube Pinterest

RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe

Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...

Keep me logged in
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts


Climate Hustle

Peter Sinclair on Climate, Sun, and Cosmic Rays

Posted on 25 December 2011 by Rob Honeycutt

This week Peter Sinclair takes on skeptic notions that the sun is causing climate change.  The video takes on The Great Global Warming Swindle showing where Durkin omits critical data that would lead to opposite conclusions than his movie's premiss.  We get clips of the late Stephen Schneider in the interview conducted by Australia's Tony Jones.  We also get a clear explanation from Jasper Kirkby at CERN that the recent results from the CLOUD experiment do not show anything that can be applied to current climate.

As always, Peter's videos are both entertaining and educational.

0 0

Bookmark and Share Printable Version  |  Link to this page


Comments 1 to 16:

  1. FYI, the Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO) has given Peter Sinclair's videos an implicit endorsement with a link to Peter's YouTube channel on the "Best Bets For More Information" page of the Scripps-Birch Aquarium web-site.
    0 0
  2. A slightly off-topic but I'm hoping to be treated as an exception one: Merry Christmass (which is already underway in the part of the globe E of GMT) to John Cook and the team of authors and the whole bunch of good commenters! you're the best blog to educate people (myself included) about AGW. And of course to Peter whose Crocks are as funny as informative. Keep doing good job!

    We are blessed with unusually mild (not so hot) December 2011 Down Under (SYD area) so Santa may feel releaved. Not so good news on the noth pole though:
    mybe he should move to the south pole at least temporarily until people (majority of them Up Over) do sth about north pole situation...
    0 0
  3. Rob H.,
    This is a terrific summary, making the CR issue quite clear. But it's Jasper Kirkby, not Kirby.
    0 0
  4. Right you are muon - correction made.
    0 0
  5. muoncounter... Good catch. Thanks.

    caerbannog... That's very cool news. I wonder if Peter knows?
    0 0
  6. chriskoz, it might be mild in Sydney, but it was over 38 in Adelaide for Xmas Eve. Cooling off today for turkey baking.
    0 0
  7. I remember very well Australian broadcaster Tony Jones’s demolishment of Martin Durkin and his film “The Great Global Warming Swindle”.

    But only last week British denier journalist James Delingpole, who states he is “right about everything”, started one of his tirades with the words:

    “Martin Durkin is a hero of mine, not just for his courage in making the first mainstream British TV programme seriously to challenge the idea of Man Made Global Warming – The Great Global Warming Swindle -----“.

    Not only do you have to be right about everything Mr. Delingpole, but you also require some credibility.

    He typifies the standard of journalism coming from the denier side.
    0 0
  8. Brian - this is off topic (so I'd understand if deleted) but Delingpole doesn't actually contribute to the Telegeaph as a journalist. He's an opinion blogger and it is now common practice for newspapers to have provocative comments sections on their web presence to increase click-fall. They are nit their to present news or analysis. Although people reading his stuff and commenting may take it seriously, it's really just play-play audience participation.
    If he didn't write cr@p, he'd be out of a job - its bit really his fault.
    0 0
  9. That may be so les but the article I referred to is from online UK Telegraph under “News” and it states:

    “James Delingpole is a writer, journalist and broadcaster --------“.

    Modern journalism is becoming opinion where the facts are not necessarily important.

    This is no way to communicate climate science (or anything else) to the public.
    0 0
  10. This site is a fabulous resource -- as are Peter Sinclair's videos on Youtube. Well done to all those who make this possible. I have learned a great deal not just from the site's principal contributors, but from the many who appear regularly in the comments.

    May you all have, along with my admiration,the very best of times in the coming season.
    0 0
  11. 9 Brian - (again, apologies for off topic) SkS is famed for backing up opinion with references;
    Dlingpole posts under "BLOGS HOME » NEWS » JAMES DELINGPOLE" which, is >Blogs then news, not the other way round.
    As for his strap-line, as I said, it's designed to wind people up to sell advertising. I've no doubt he started as a journalist... births/weddings/deaths/lost dogs etc... which has stood him in good stead to provide very few column inches he manages from time-to-time.
    0 0
  12. Peter Sinclair also has a site at Climate Crocks, where he makes frequent posts on enviro and climate-related news.
    Also, the site comments on this latest Climate, Sun, Cosmic Rays video has 2 useful links:
    1.) An ArsTechnica article about climate and cosmic rays

    2.)The actual recent paper by Purdue's Ernest Agee posted at Judith Curry's
    0 0
  13. DMarshall#12,

    Thanks for the link to the Agee et al 2011 paper, although I feel somewhat tarnished by having to go through Curry to read it.

    Agee is very clear:

    It is concluded that the observational results presented, showing several years of disconnect between GCRs and lower troposphere global cloudiness, add additional concern to the cosmic ray-cloud connection hypothesis. In fact, this has been done in the most dramatic way with the measurement of record high levels of GCRs during the deep, extended quiet period of cycle 23-24, which is accompanied by record low levels of lower troposphere global cloudiness.

    Their Figure 2 (comparison of GCR flux with ISCCP low cloud amount) makes it clear where the excitement generated by the early papers proclaiming 'clouds correlate with GCRs' originated. There is indeed a slight reduction in cloud amount coincident with reduced GCR flux in 1990-91 and then an uptick in cloud amount as GCR flux increased through 1994. But from 1994 on, the cloud amount has decreased, while GCRs started a strong increase in 2004.

    In short, the fuss over GCRs was generated by basing a conclusion on too short a dataset - and ignoring everything since. Note how often that behavior pops up among those who seek to push these fringe hypotheses.
    0 0
  14. Les@11 – this is not off topic because Peter Sinclair’s video contains the perennial theme of media climate science misinformation.

    Do not dismiss Delingpole as a fringe blogger. He writes books and does many interviews - even Prof. Paul Nurse interviewed him for his BBC documentary “Science under Attack”. (preview only)
    which helped Delingpole’s profile and credibility.

    Just as with climate change, there is the “accumulative effect” of misinformation.
    0 0
  15. Did anyone notice that the graph showing temperature vs. solar activity in the beginning of the film is doubly misleading? Not only does the curve for solar activity conveniently stop in 1980 just before the two curves start to move away from each other, but it is also wrong for another reason.

    Solar activity did not peak around 1940 and drop after that, but continued to climb until its highest recorded level in the late 1950’s, as you can se here. That is almost 20 years after the peak in temperature. When the temperature levelled out and dropped a bit, the solar activity was still increasing to its highest level seen for several hundred years. Solar activity lags temperature?

    Did they use the wrong curve for solar activity to create a better match with the temperature before 1980, or am I just overly suspicious here?

    I guess we know the answer to that…
    0 0
  16. HK - the graph in question is very strange, because it actually plots solar cycle length rather than solar activity. In fact, as I recall, it's inverse solar cycle length, because shorter solar cycles correlated with higher temperatures. Just playing with correlations, really (unless I'm recalling incorrectly).
    0 0

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.

The Consensus Project Website


(free to republish)

Smartphone Apps


© Copyright 2018 John Cook
Home | Links | Translations | About Us | Contact Us