There is a lot more I could say about this group of people who have read and commented here.  I know of very few unmoderated blogs which have been able to maintain such a civil tone through such controversial subjects.  That says a lot about the quality of this group.  Of all things, I think that is what makes tAV special.  The world is a rough place and when I sat down one sunny Saturday morning to start this blog just over two years ago, I expected very little. In the end, tAV contributed more to the discussion on a truly global scale than I had ever imagined.

I may be back after some time off but it is better to let readers know where I’m at.

Best regards to all.


On the SOP thread we got into too heated a discussion.  I’ve had more than my fair share of the public lately and don’t know when tAV will be back.

Of all the elements of the periodic table stupididium is the most abundant.  The idiots pushed me over  the edge tonight.   I’ve had well enough of people who think they know — well anything — yet don’t have a clue.  The blog has been very much entertaining and I’ve appreciated the technical contributors very thoroughly.  I may continue someday in coming years but at this point… I’m done.

I’ve spent two years of my life in climate science, digging fairly deeply – I think you’ll agree.  My conclusion is that those who believe they know believe for unknowable reasons.  This includes BOTH sides.  In what I believe is the rarest of cases, the middle ground is the correct ground and that is where the climate battle lies.

I don’t know if I will post again here, it has been fun though.  Thanks to all who have been supportive and thanks to the guests.

Jeff Condon

What Evidence for “Unprecedented Warming”?

This is a new paper which takes a look at the statistical uncertainty of the long term warming trends by Pat Frank.  He looks at the uncertainty of the data including that created by non-stationary errors and comes to the reasonable conclusion that global trends for the length of the temp record are statistically indistinguishable from zero.  This has particular implications for model verification and especially to the real need for vetting errors in station measurements.  Pat asked me to post on it here, and he has written a blog style explanation of his results below.

I want to copy the abstract and a bit of the conclusion here before his post just to help frame the discussion.

Sensor measurement uncertainty has never been fully considered in prior appraisals of global average surface air temperature. The estimated average ±0.2 C station error has been incorrectly assessed as random, and the systematic error from uncontrolled variables has been invariably neglected. The systematic errors in measurements from three ideally sited and maintained temperature sensors are calculated herein. Combined with the ±0.2 C average station error, a representative lower-limit uncertainty of ±0.46 C was found for any global annual surface air temperature anomaly. This ±0.46 C reveals that the global surface air temperature anomaly trend  from 1880 through 2000 is statistically indistinguishable from 0 C, and represents a lower limit of calibration uncertainty for climate models and for any prospective physically justifiable proxy reconstruction of paleo-temperature. The rate and magnitude of 20th century warming are thus unknowable, and suggestions of an unprecedented trend in 20th century global air temperature are unsustainable.

Continue reading “What Evidence for “Unprecedented Warming”?”


Today someone made a comment on the Cuccinelli vs Dr. Man thing which has me stirred up a bit.  I fully understand that some scientists may have the opinion that you don’t want Academics worrying about politics and there is some kind of problem with legal requests for emails.  What unfortunately has happened in AGW though is that politics became some Academics primary concern.  What is not correct though is that some have assumed that subpoenaing emials is unusual.

If you choose the business rout of life, you are the bad guy and therefore forced to comply with endless legal hurdles.  If you are wise, you have a group of lawyers to advise you on those hurdles.  Did you know that if an employer pays 100% of the health/life/dental care for their employees and an employee doesn’t agree to accept the FREE health care, it is discrimination by the employer?!!   Discrimination!!   I would like to start a university which only teaches the degrees of discriminology and discriminology tech – whereby the tech version doesn’t have real math!   What a crazy world when everyone’s opinions average to that kind of stupid.

Anyway, if you are working with a vendor/customer under an agreement and you guys have a falling out, what is the first thing you do when going to court?

YOU SUBPOENA THE EMAILS!!  And if you don’t hand them over, guess what?!!!

sorry for the caps — not really —  but wake up people, this is what lawyers do — every single day!!    This is SOP.  The real question should be – why are academics IMMUNE!

Welcome to Earth, people who believe in massive government–… spank!!  Breathe baby, breathe.

Above the Law

Most will notice that I’ve not been blogging this week. There really isn’t any time but Cuccinelli is now being given a new hurdle to uncover Mann’s emails. Virginia senators are considering changing law to prevent Mann’s private emails from being read.  First the university claims they don’t exist, then as it is found that the emails do exist “friends of Mann” spend a half million dollars to make sure nobody can see them.  Now Mann has enough friends in (leftist) government that they would change the law to protect his emails from being read.

Think about that!  I’m tired of government funded corruption and lies and the parties which revel in it.  How incredibly deep does the corruption extend. Even if you think your favorite politician is doing a good job, giving these  people more power is insane.

This is how Brian McKenzie ends his thougtful piece linked above.

“There are 50 scientific organizations in 50 countries all around the world that came to the same conclusion,” Toscano said. “This is really an inappropriate use of tax dollars.”

Very thoughtful Brian, nice work.

H/T Bishop Hill and WUWT

A Superfund Story

By John Pittman

If you want to read the regs start with CERCLA, then SARA. After reading the first few pages you will probably want to come back here to read this because you will realize I would have to be practically brain dead to be as boring as reading regs.

Superfund was set up with good intentions. Of course, that statement also in general implies there is a problem that has been hard to solve using the normal and usual mechanisms and the politicians have stepped in. Super fund is NOT an exception to this. So, I am going to tell a true story about Superfund.

My introduction to CERCLA or Superfund came about earlier in my career than the main story, but it provides some needed background. The first environmental job I had was investigating PCB contamination that had shown up in a body of water. In this case, we have the archetypical businesses that caused Superfund to happen in the first place.

Continue reading “A Superfund Story”

The Evidence of Failure

By John Pittman

I think there is enough evidence to show that the IPCC has failed. I am not talking about the perceived tactical failure of Copenhagen or Cancun, but a more fundamental failure on their part. In Anticipating Failure, I wrote about how environmental issues have been successful resolved. One of the other dirty little secrets that is not proclaimed is that such programs based on Clean Water Act, “Superfund”-CERCLA, “Community-Right-to-Know”, Clean Air Act and Amendments, etc., is that they have been successful. Making sure that there was measurable harm, and a framework of doable activities fairly administrated has made the air, the water, the land, and the groundwater safer and cleaner. The system(s) does have its problems and costs, its successes and failures. However, in general, it has been a success.

Continue reading “The Evidence of Failure”

Anticipating Failure

Guest post by John Pittman, but  before that I have something to add.

I accepted this post on John’s  past reputation without even looking at the content.  John doesn’t share my political views on many things so this post was a surprise.  Without a doubt I’m getting older, so it is not often that the perspective of my own opinion is changed, John has done exactly that.


Anticipating Failure

I think the failures of Copenhagen and Cancun are going to be the start of a series of failures, though, hopefully not expensive ones. There will be two main classes of failure, but the root cause will be the same. The two failures will be first, ineffectual, expensive “feel-good” or moral “rent-seeking” projects, and the other will be continued failure to reach a binding substantive agreement. Over at Dr. Curry’s blog , they are looking at the issue of defining the relevance of practitioner and other forms of knowledge. There is an error by some on either side with equating problems as part of good versus bad on a singular aspect of the issue. I will make the argument it is systemic, and pervading, and such discussions will not be fruitful since they are misidentifying the problem.

Continue reading “Anticipating Failure”

Teleconnections — Shoot your own foot

It is a sad day in America (and the world) when a lunatic in Arizona attempted to murder dozens of people, killing six and hospitalizing others including Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.  If you pray, please pray for the victims.

It is even sadder when lunatics with agenda’s turn this into an anti-conservative political moment, taking gains from the nightmares of good people.  This is exactly what has happened on leftist news media, blogs and now — climate blogs.  Fox News had an article on some of the premature attacks on conservatives that started immediately after the shootings and well before anyone knew what was going on.

After the facts started coming in, Others tried to find a way to suggest that the lunatic was not-a-leftist writing anything to keep the anti-conservative lies in the public’s eye.  People are sick to use a nutcase for a political example, but the sickness extends to unexpected quarters including prominent climate scientist James Annan.

Continue reading “Teleconnections — Shoot your own foot”

EIV/TLS Regression – Why Use It?

This is a guest post reprinted with permission from Roman M’s blog statpad.  I found this to be the best explanation I’ve read of the difference in OLS and EIV methods and it has the additional benefit of discovering that the solutions of the EIV regression are dependent on the input scaling.   The effects of the scaling differences are dependent on the data you started with but EIV, looks to be a pretty dangerous here.  The critique applies to several popular climatology reconstruction methods to which the problem may or may not be a minor one.   Roman  put it all all into one very nice post.

Roman M —–

Over the last month or two, I have been looking at the response by Schmidt, Mann, and Rutherford to McShane and Wyner’s paper on the hockey stick.  In the process, I took a closer look at the total least squares (error –in-variables or EIV) regression procedure which is an integral part of the methodology used by the hockey team in their paleo reconstructions.  Some of what I found surprised me.

A brief explanation of the difference between ordinary least squares (OLS) and EIV is in order.  Some further information can be found on the Wiki Error-in-Variables and Total least squares pages.  We will first look at the case where there is a single predictor.

Continue reading “EIV/TLS Regression – Why Use It?”

Let it Rain

Anastassia Makarieva has been graciously keeping me up to date on the goings on with their recent publication.  She sent me an email today with a bit of a surprise.

Dear Colleagues

Recently news sneaked in here and there that a “secret” project in Abu Dhabi has successfully created artificial rainstorms.

Continue reading “Let it Rain”

Tell us what you really think

Judith Curry has a post on Libertarians and environment.  Apparenlty, I’ve been keeping my opinions to myslef too much lately because after reading the following sentence, I let loose with a chapter size description of my opinions.  It’s like I don’t have a blog or something.

So why do Libertarians seem generally to be opposed to the idea of AGW and policies like carbon cap and trade?


Thank you for your accurate description of the Air Vent. It’s quite rare to see really.

Climate change is a separate issue from politics. Politically, I see liberals state that liberalism is about personal freedom followed by conservatives want to control your choices, as a form of cognitive dissonance. Perhaps it was that way a hundred years ago, but definitely not today. Liberal social policies/freedoms only reach as far as sex and drugs, everything else is about cracking down on personal choice. Which schools, foods, fuels, lightbulbs, money, exercise, insurance and even thoughts you should accept are dictated in modern democratic dogma. On that line, I’ve always found religious conservatism to be another form of the same thing, freedom for everything except sex and drugs-which should be dictated by government. — It’s oversimple but basically my thinking.

Then you have those of us who just want the government to stop making these decisions for us. Everyone has their pet peeves in the world if they are allowed to make choices for others in democracy, freedoms gradually vanish. I would just like to be given the opportunity to live life as I see fit, without all the rest of the world telling me what is the best food to eat, where to spend my money or which fuel I should burn. Nobody is qualified to make those choices for me, I do just fine on my own, and I’m not even considering making them for you.

Continue reading “Tell us what you really think”

A half million dollar coverup – and going

SPPI sent me their press release on Cuccinelli’s efforts to make Michael Mann’s email public.  I don’t for a minute believe that Cuccinelli is interested in protecting government money already spent – which is what the law is supposed to protect – he’s trying to make public Mann’s emails.   This story is getting more interesting because anyone who has payed attention understands that Mann’s emails are probably so full of advocacy and underhanded dealings with the climate science community that it will make climategate look like a junior high love letter.  It seems that the university is highly aware of the problems these emails will create as apparently they have spent over a half million making sure they don’t become public.

In response to a previous FOIA request, UVA had denied these records existed. But during the course of Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s pre-investigation under the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act (“FATA”), a 2007 law passed unanimously by Virginia’s legislature that clearly covers the work of taxpayer-funded academics, UVA dropped this stance. Court records reveal that counsel for the University has indicated instead that the Mann-related records do in fact exist, on a backup server. To avoid University delay or claims for huge search fees, today’s request specifically directs the school to search that server.

While the school has spent upwards of half a million dollars to date fighting Cuccinelli’s pursuit, now before the Virginia Supreme Court, under FOIA it has one week to produce the documents, with no exemption for UVA’s arguments used to block Cuccinelli. These records address one of the highest-profile claims used to advance massive economic interventions policies in the name of ‘global warming.’

In my experience, corporations don’t spend that kind of cash unless they are facing the loss of greater money somewhere else.

Kicking Puppies

Recently at WUWT, I made a post on a thought experiment about the greenhouse effect.  It was fun IMO, despite less than optimal wording. People got to vote on a couple of different situations which help them sort the reasons that ‘greenhouse’ is a misnomer.  Well of course in the wild blue of the internet, you can pick up some interesting folk.  I picked up someone who calls himself Will who has been explaining how fooled and dishonest people are who describe the AGW greenhouse effect.  The thread is linked here if you’re interested in the complete history.  Will is of the opinion that AGW is completely impossible, it’s not that far from my own except that I say it’s a real effect of unknown magnitude.  Ok, so it is opposite.

Anyway, the dialog continued until even Anthony got tired of it.  Sorry Anthony but I’m dogged if nothing else.  It ended like this:


You are the Cliff Claven of WUWT. 🙂

To which he replied:

I have presented a sound logical argument as to why the “Greenhouse Effect” is bogus. I have given data backed by real replicable experiments.

Followed by:

I’ll tell you what Will, who is so certain he’s proved science wrong. If you like, I’ll do a post on your spinonthat page linked above that got the approval of your friend. If I can’t find 10 distinct errors in the single post, I’ll apologize for comparing you to Cliff Claven.

I didn’t know if he would reply but boy did he let ‘er rip.

You, do a post on my Diurnal Bulge paper? Ha! Boy you got some ego I’ll give you that.


10 distinct errors? In your dreams.

Hmm. Continue reading “Kicking Puppies”