date: Wed Jul 9 11:00:41 2008 from: Phil Jones subject: RE: Radon. to: "Arnold Wolfendale" Dear Arnold, Thanks for the paper. Getting into climate science can seem difficult. Climate Science seems to be ever expanding. I often get requests to comment on all manner of things - from the G8 summit statement yesterday to carbon savings from renewable technologies and biofuels. I try to stay in what I know which is the climate science, but the media and the public seem to think I should be a fount of all knowledge on all things climate. G8 did at least endorse the IPCC, but the politicians don't seem to have much idea of what to do about it or how serious it might become. They have opportunities for far-sightedness, but they all work on a different timescale. The Svensmark hypothesis is just about ignored in what I like to call mainstream climate science (the WG1 reports of IPCC). I presume you've talked to Mike Lockwood about your work. Svensmark at least publishes his work in the literature (not mainstream climate journals) and acts like a scientist. There is a whole raft of skeptics who have found each other through the internet and this is where it gets nasty on some of the blog sites. Cheers Phil At 12:04 08/07/2008, you wrote: Dear Phil, Many thanks for your prompt reply. I was interested in your remarks about radon and cloud cover.It seems to us that if Svensmark et al. were right there would be some effect,at least for those regions where the radon level is very high.The highest radon level in the world is,apparently,in Ramsar,Iran.So far,however,we have not been able to obtain contours.A 'state secret' it seems!No effect in Southern India. Your remarks about the ISCCLP data being error-prone are well taken.However,they are the best we have.The change in 1994,sometimes attributed to orbit changes,etc.,may well be genuine,insofar as this is when the anthropic temperature rise seems to bite and,furthermore, we find increased variability in various cloud parameters after then. Thank you for the 'Swedish paper';most interesting. I'm sending a copy of our published paper.We have more on the stocks. I must say that Cosmic Ray Physics and Cosmology,my usual areas,are a damned sight easier than yours! Kind Regards, Arnold. -----Original Message----- From: Phil Jones [[1]mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk] Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 11:29 AM To: Arnold Wolfendale Subject: Re: Radon. Arnold, As you're aware there is a large literature on the subject of cloud cover variations and surface air temperatures. No knowledge of any work with radon and cloud cover. Biggest problem is that the cloud cover obs are fairly short and/or affected by biases - both surface observer based and satellite based. Satellite clouds have the same problems as measurements on lower tropospheric temps due to differing satellites and changes in orbits. The ISCCLP dataset is affected. The attached is just a small example of the problems of putting together a surface-based cloud dataset for Sweden. Cheers Phil At 10:19 08/07/2008, you wrote: > >Dear Phil, > Do you know of any work on possible correlations of radon with Cloud >cover or ground level temperature?We have done some work in this area >but being newcomers to the field we are not adequately acquainted with >who has done what. > Our interest stems from the need to check the Svensmark >hypothesis.Although far-fetched it needs checking carefully.we have >done some work already but need to be sure. > Kind Regards, > Arnold. > (Sir Arnold Wolfendale FRS) Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 University of East Anglia Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk NR4 7TJ UK ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 University of East Anglia Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk NR4 7TJ UK ----------------------------------------------------------------------------