Frsluflokkur: Utanrkisml/aljaml

Eiga sr sta loftslagsbreytingar af mannavldum...?

Loftslagsbreytingar af mannnavldum

r Viskiptablainu 13. desember 2006

Fyrir um ratug var stutt vital vi essa vsindamenn sem teljast vera vera meal eirra reyndustu svii veur- og loftslagsfra hr landi.

r: "Um er a ra samspil margra tta sem gerir mli flki".

Trausti: "Mli er flki og margtt og erfitt a fullyra niokku um a".

Pll Bergrsson, okkar allra reyndasti og virtasti veurfringur, er sama sinnis
og hefur birt hugaverar kenningar um hrif hafssins svokallaa 60 ra sveiflu.

Allir eru essir vsindamenn sammla um a a hafi hlna undanfrnum ratugum,
losun koltvildi hafi aukist verulega, en ekki s hgt a kenna styrk
koltvildis eingngu um breytingar hitafari, svo a hrif ess su einhver.

Leidretting NASA Moggi

r Morgunblainu dag 3. desember 2015

Eldri bloggpistlar sem fjalla um raunverulega "manngera hlnun":

Hvers vegna er NASA a afmynda hitaferilinn fyrir Reykjavk...?

Kann einhver skil essum undarlegheitum...?



Mgnu ra Dr. Patrick Moore stofnanda Greenpeace...

Dr. Patrick Moore umhverfisfringur, stofnandiGreenpeace, hlt sustu vikumagnaanfyrirlestur. Myndband er hr fyrir nean, en prentaa tgfu m lesa near sunni ea me v a smellahr.

Dr. Patrick Moorevar mjg virkur aktvisti yngri rum, meal annars skipinu Rainbow Warrior sem vi munum flest eftir.

Svo ttai hann sig a hann og flagar hans vru villigtum og snri vi blainu...

Patrick Moore rir hr uppvaxtarr sn og sklagngu og tma sem hann starfai me Greenpeace eftir a hann tk tt stofnun samtakanna, svo og hvers vegna hann yfirgaf samtkin. San fjallar hann um koltvsring jarsgunni og bendir msar jkvar hliar mlsins, en koltvsringur er undirstaa alls lfs jrinni.

etta er einkar frlegt og vel ess viri a hlusta. neitanlega umhugsunarverur vinkill mli.

Mgnu ra hlain skynsemi: "Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?

(Sj anna myndband nest sunni).

Hr er gmul vefsa fr Greenpeace.

The Founders of Greenpeace

Patrick Moore er annar fr vinstri efri r myndinni essari gmlu Greenpeace vefsu, sem er afritu hr fyrir nean.


Kjsi einhver a lesa frekar en a horfa, er fyrirlesturinn ea ran fr 14. oktber 2015 hr heild sinni:

My Lords and Ladies, Ladies and Gentlemen.

Thank you for the opportunity to set out my views on climate change. As I have stated publicly on many occasions, there is no definitive scientific proof, through real-world observation, that carbon dioxide is responsible for any of the slight warming of the global climate that has occurred during the past 300 years, since the peak of the Little Ice Age. If there were such a proof through testing and replication it would have been written down for all to see.

The contention that human emissions are now the dominant influence on climate is simply a hypothesis, rather than a universally accepted scientific theory. It is therefore correct, indeed verging on compulsory in the scientific tradition, to be skeptical of those who express certainty that “the science is settled” and “the debate is over”.

But there is certainty beyond any doubt that CO2 is the building block for all life on Earth and that without its presence in the global atmosphere at a sufficient concentration this would be a dead planet. Yet today our children and our publics are taught that CO2 is a toxic pollutant that will destroy life and bring civilization to its knees. Tonight I hope to turn this dangerous human-caused propaganda on its head. Tonight I will demonstrate that human emissions of CO2 have already saved life on our planet from a very untimely end. That in the absence of our emitting some of the carbon back into the atmosphere from whence it came in the first place, most or perhaps all life on Earth would begin to die less than two million years from today.

But first a bit of background.

I was born and raised in the tiny floating village of Winter Harbour on the northwest tip of Vancouver Island, in the rainforest by the Pacific. There was no road to my village so for eight years myself and a few other children were taken by boat each day to a one-room schoolhouse in the nearby fishing village. I didn’t realize how lucky I was playing on the tide flats by the salmon-spawning streams in the rainforest, until I was sent off to boarding school in Vancouver where I excelled in science. I did my undergraduate studies at the University of British Columbia, gravitating to the life sciences – biology, biochemistry, genetics, and forestry – the environment and the industry my family has been in for more than 100 years. Then, before the word was known to the general public, I discovered the science of ecology, the science of how all living things are inter-related, and how we are related to them. At the height of the Cold War, the Vietnam War, the threat of all-out nuclear war and the newly emerging consciousness of the environment I was transformed into a radical environmental activist. While doing my PhD in ecology in 1971 I joined a group of activists who had begun to meet in the basement of the Unitarian Church, to plan a protest voyage against US hydrogen bomb testing in Alaska.

We proved that a somewhat rag-tag looking group of activists could sail an old fishing boat across the north Pacific ocean and help change the course of history. We created a focal point for the media to report on public opposition to the tests.

When that H-bomb exploded in November 1971, it was the last hydrogen bomb the United States ever detonated. Even though there were four more tests planned in the series, President Nixon canceled them due to the public opposition we had helped to create. That was the birth of Greenpeace.

Flushed with victory, on our way home from Alaska we were made brothers of the Namgis Nation in their Big House at Alert Bay near my northern Vancouver Island home. For Greenpeace this began the tradition of the Warriors of the Rainbow, after a Cree Indian legend that predicted the coming together of all races and creeds to save the Earth from destruction. We named our ship the Rainbow Warrior and I spent the next fifteen years in the top committee of Greenpeace, on the front lines of the environmental movement as we evolved from that church basement into the world’s largest environmental activist organization.

Next we took on French atmospheric nuclear testing in the South Pacific. They proved a bit more difficult than the US nuclear tests. It took years to eventually drive these tests underground at Mururoa Atoll in French Polynesia. In 1985, under direct orders from President Mitterrand, French commandos bombed and sank the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland Harbour, killing our photographer. Those protests continued until long after I left Greenpeace. It wasn’t until the mid-1990s that nuclear testing finally ended in the South Pacific, and it most other parts of the world as well.

Going back to 1975, Greenpeace set out to save the whales from extinction at the hands of huge factory whaling fleets. We confronted the Soviet factory whaling fleet in the North Pacific, putting ourselves in front of their harpoons in our little rubber boats to protect the fleeing whales. This was broadcast on television news around the world, bringing the Save the Whales movement into everyone’s living rooms for the first time. After four years of voyages, in 1979 factory whaling was finally banned in the North Pacific, and by 1981 in all the world’s oceans.

In 1978 I sat on a baby seal off the East Coast of Canada to protect it from the hunter’s club. I was arrested and hauled off to jail, the seal was clubbed and skinned, but a photo of me being arrested while sitting on the baby seal appeared in more than 3000 newspapers around the world the next morning. We won the hearts and minds of millions of people who saw the baby seal slaughter as outdated, cruel, and unnecessary.

Why then did I leave Greenpeace after 15 years in the leadership? When Greenpeace began we had a strong humanitarian orientation, to save civilization from destruction by all-out nuclear war. Over the years the “peace” in Greenpeace was gradually lost and my organization, along with much of the environmental movement, drifted into a belief that humans are the enemies of the earth. I believe in a humanitarian environmentalism because we are part of nature, not separate from it. The first principle of ecology is that we are all part of the same ecosystem, as Barbara Ward put it, “One human family on spaceship Earth”, and to preach otherwise teaches that the world would be better off without us. As we shall see later in the presentation there is very good reason to see humans as essential to the survival of life on this planet.

In the mid 1980s I found myself the only director of Greenpeace International with a formal education in science. My fellow directors proposed a campaign to “ban chlorine worldwide”, naming it “The Devil’s Element”. I pointed out that chlorine is one of the elements in the Periodic Table, one of the building blocks of the Universe and the 11th most common element in the Earth’s crust. I argued the fact that chlorine is the most important element for public health and medicine. Adding chlorine to drinking water was the biggest advance in the history of public health and the majority of our synthetic medicines are based on chlorine chemistry. This fell on deaf ears, and for me this was the final straw. I had to leave.

When I left Greenpeace I vowed to develop an environmental policy that was based on science and logic rather than sensationalism, misinformation, anti-humanism and fear. In a classic example, a recent protest led by Greenpeace in the Philippines used the skull and crossbones to associate Golden Rice with death, when in fact Golden Rice has the potential to help save 2 million children from death due to vitamin A deficiency every year.

The Keeling curve of CO2 concentration in the Earth’s atmosphere since 1959 is the supposed smoking gun of catastrophic climate change. We presume CO2 was at 280 ppm at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, before human activity could have caused a significant impact. I accept that most of the rise from 280 to 400 ppm is caused by human CO2 emissions with the possibility that some of it is due to outgassing from warming of the oceans.

NASA tells us that “Carbon Dioxide Controls Earth’s Temperature” in child-like denial of the many other factors involved in climate change. This is reminiscent of NASA’s contention that there might be life on Mars. Decades after it was demonstrated that there was no life on Mars, NASA continues to use it as a hook to raise public funding for more expeditions to the Red Planet. The promulgation of fear of Climate Change now serves the same purpose. As Bob Dylan prophetically pointed out, “Money doesn’t talk, it swears”, even in one of the most admired science organizations in the world.

On the political front the leaders of the G7 plan to “end extreme poverty and hunger” by phasing out 85% of the world’s energy supply including 98% of the energy used to transport people and goods, including food. The Emperors of the world appear clothed in the photo taken at the close of the meeting but it was obviously Photo-shopped. They should be required to stand naked for making such a foolish statement.

The world’s top climate body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change, is hopelessly conflicted by its makeup and it mandate. The Panel is composed solely of the World Meteorological Organization, weather forecasters, and the United Nations Environment Program, environmentalists. Both these organizations are focused primarily on short-term timescales, days to maybe a century or two. But the most significant conflict is with the Panel’s mandate from the United Nations. They are required only to focus on “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the atmosphere, and which is in addition to natural climate variability.”€So if the IPCC found that climate change was not being affected by human alteration of the atmosphere or that it is not “dangerous” there would be no need for them to exist. They are virtually mandated to find on the side of apocalypse.

Scientific certainty, political pandering, a hopelessly conflicted IPCC, and now the Pope, spiritual leader of the Catholic Church, in a bold move to reinforce the concept of original sin, says the Earth looks like “an immense pile of filth” and we must go back to pre-industrial bliss, or is that squalor?

And then there is the actual immense pile of filth fed to us more than three times daily by the green-media nexus, a seething cauldron of imminent doom, like we are already condemned to Damnation in Hell and there is little chance of Redemption. I fear for the end of the Enlightenment. I fear an intellectual Gulag with Greenpeace as my prison guards.

Let’s begin with our knowledge of the long-term history of the Earth’s temperature and of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere. Our best inference from various proxies back indicate that CO2 was higher for the first 4 billion years of Earth’s history than it has been since the Cambrian Period until today. I will focus on the past 540 million years since modern life forms evolved. It is glaringly obvious that temperature and CO2 are in an inverse correlation at least as often as they are in any semblance of correlation. Two clear examples of reverse correlation occurred 150 million years and 50 million years ago. At the end of the Jurassic temperature fell dramatically while CO2 spiked. During the Eocene Thermal Maximum, temperature was likely higher than any time in the past 550 million years while CO2 had been on a downward track for 100 million years. This evidence alone sufficient to warrant deep speculation of any claimed lock-step causal relationship between CO2 and temperature.

The Devonian Period beginning 400 million years ago marked the culmination of the invasion of life onto the land. Plants evolved to produce lignin, which in combination with cellulose, created wood which in turn for the first time allowed plants to grow tall, in competition with each other for sunlight. As vast forests spread across the land living biomass increased by orders of magnitude, pulling down carbon as CO2 from the atmosphere to make wood. Lignin is very difficult to break down and no decomposer species possessed the enzymes to digest it. Trees died atop one another until they were 100 metres or more in depth. This was the making of the great coal beds around the world as this huge store of sequestered carbon continued to build for 90 million years. Then, fortunately for the future of life, white rot fungi evolved to produce the enzymes that can digest lignin and coincident with that the coal-making era came to an end.

There was no guarantee that fungi or any other decomposer species would develop the complex of enzymes required to digest lignin. If they had not, CO2, which had already been drawn down for the first time in Earth’s history to levels similar to todays, would have continued to decline as trees continued to grow and die. That is until CO2 approached the threshold of 150 ppm below which plants begin first to starve, then stop growing altogether, and then die. Not just woody plants but all plants. This would bring about the extinction of most, if not all, terrestrial species, as animals, insects, and other invertebrates starved for lack of food. And that would be that. The human species would never have existed. This was only the first time that there was a distinct possibility that life would come close to extinguishing itself, due to a shortage of CO2, which is essential for life on Earth.

A well-documented record of global temperature over the past 65 million years shows that we have been in a major cooling period since the Eocene Thermal Maximum 50 million years ago. The Earth was an average 16C warmer then, with most of the increased warmth at the higher latitudes. The entire planet, including the Arctic and Antarctica were ice-free and the land there was covered in forest. The ancestors of every species on Earth today survived through what may have been the warmest time in the history of life. It makes one wonder about dire predictions that even a 2C rise in temperature from pre-industrial times would cause mass extinctions and the destruction of civilization. Glaciers began to form in Antarctica 30 million years ago and in the northern hemisphere 3 million years ago. Today, even in this interglacial period of the Pleistocene Ice Age, we are experiencing one of the coldest climates in the Earth’s history.

Coming closer to the present we have learned from Antarctic ice cores that for the past 800,000 years there have been regular periods of major glaciation followed by interglacial periods in 100,000 year-cycles. These cycles coincide with the Milankovitch cycles that are tied to the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit and its axial tilt. It is highly plausible that these cycles are related to solar intensity and the seasonal distribution of solar heat on the Earth’s surface. There is a strong correlation between temperature and the level of atmospheric CO2 during these successive glaciations, indicating a possible cause-effect relationship between the two. CO2 lags temperature by an average of 800 years during the most recent 400,000-year period, indicating that temperature is the cause, as the cause never comes after the effect.

Looking at the past 50,000 years of temperature and CO2 we can see that changes in CO2 follow changes in temperature. This is as one could expect, as the Milankovitch cycles are far more likely to cause a change in temperature than a change in CO2. And a change in the temperature is far more likely to cause a change in CO2 due to outgassing of CO2 from the oceans during warmer times and an ingassing (absorption) of CO2 during colder periods. Yet climate alarmists persist in insisting that CO2 is causing the change in temperature, despite the illogical nature of that assertion.

It is sobering to consider the magnitude of climate change during the past 20,000 years, since the peak of the last major glaciation. At that time there were 3.3 kilometres of ice on top of what is today the city of Montreal, a city of more than 3 million people. 95% of Canada was covered in a sheet of ice. Even as far south as Chicago there was nearly a kilometre of ice. If the Milankovitch cycle continues to prevail, and there is little reason aside from our CO2 emissions to think otherwise, this will happen gradually again during the next 80,000 years. Will our CO2 emissions stave off another glaciation as James Lovelock has suggested? There doesn’t seem to be much hope of that so far, as despite 1/3 of all our CO2 emissions being released during the past 18 years the UK Met Office contends there has been no statistically significant warming during this century.

At the height of the last glaciation the sea level was about 120 metres lower than it is today. By 7,000 years ago all the low-altitude, mid-latitude glaciers had melted. There is no consensus about the variation in sea level since then although many scientists have concluded that the sea level was higher than today during the Holocene Thermal optimum from 9,000 to 5,000 years ago when the Sahara was green. The sea level may also have been higher than today during the Medieval Warm Period.

Hundred of islands near the Equator in Papua, Indonesia, have been undercut by the sea in a manner that gives credence to the hypothesis that there has been little net change in sea level in the past thousands of years. It takes a long time for so much erosion to occur from gentle wave action in a tropical sea.

Coming back to the relationship between temperature and CO2 in the modern era we can see that temperature has risen at a steady slow rate in Central England since 1700 while human CO2 emissions were not relevant until 1850 and then began an exponential rise after 1950. This is not indicative of a direct causal relationship between the two. After freezing over regularly during the Little Ice Age the River Thames froze for the last time in 1814, as the Earth moved into what might be called the Modern Warm Period.

The IPCC states it is “extremely likely” that human emissions have been the dominant cause of global warming “since the mid-20th century”, that is since 1950. They claim that “extremely” means 95% certain, even though the number 95 was simply plucked from the air like an act of magic. And “likely” is not a scientific word but rather indicative of a judgment, another word for an opinion.

There was a 30-year period of warming from 1910-1940, then a cooling from 1940 to 1970, just as CO2 emissions began to rise exponentially, and then a 30-year warming from 1970-2000 that was very similar in duration and temperature rise to the rise from 1910-1940. One may then ask “what caused the increase in temperature from 1910-1940 if it was not human emissions? And if it was natural factors how do we know that the same natural factors were not responsible for the rise between 1970-2000.” You don’t need to go back millions of years to find the logical fallacy in the IPCC’s certainty that we are the villains in the piece.

Water is by far the most important greenhouse gas, and is the only molecule that is present in the atmosphere in all three states, gas, liquid, and solid. As a gas, water vapour is a greenhouse gas, but as a liquid and solid it is not. As a liquid water forms clouds, which send solar radiation back into space during the day and hold heat in at night. There is no possibility that computer models can predict the net effect of atmospheric water in a higher CO2 atmosphere. Yet warmists postulate that higher CO2 will result in positive feedback from water, thus magnifying the effect of CO2 alone by 2-3 times. Other scientists believe that water may have a neutral or negative feedback on CO2. The observational evidence from the early years of this century tends to reinforce the latter hypothesis.

How many politicians or members of the media or the public are aware of this statement about climate change from the IPCC in 2007?

we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled nonlinear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.

There is a graph showing that the climate models have grossly exaggerated the rate of warming that confirms the IPCC statement. The only trends the computer models seem able to predict accurately are ones that have already occurred.

Coming to the core of my presentation, CO2 is the currency of life and the most important building block for all life on Earth. All life is carbon-based, including our own. Surely the carbon cycle and its central role in the creation of life should be taught to our children rather than the demonization of CO2, that “carbon” is a “pollutant” that threatens the continuation of life. We know for a fact that CO2 is essential for life and that it must be at a certain level in the atmosphere for the survival of plants, which are the primary food for all the other species alive today. Should we not encourage our citizens, students, teachers, politicians, scientists, and other leaders to celebrate CO2 as the giver of life that it is?

It is a proven fact that plants, including trees and all our food crops, are capable of growing much faster at higher levels of CO2 than present in the atmosphere today. Even at the today’s concentration of 400 ppm plants are relatively starved for nutrition. The optimum level of CO2 for plant growth is about 5 times higher, 2000 ppm, yet the alarmists warn it is already too high. They must be challenged every day by every person who knows the truth in this matter. CO2 is the giver of life and we should celebrate CO2 rather than denigrate it as is the fashion today.

We are witnessing the “Greening of the Earth” as higher levels of CO2, due to human emissions from the use of fossil fuels, promote increased growth of plants around the world. This has been confirmed by scientists with CSIRO in Australia, in Germany, and in North America. Only half of the CO2 we are emitting from the use of fossil fuels is showing up in the atmosphere. The balance is going somewhere else and the best science says most of it is going into an increase in global plant biomass. And what could be wrong with that, as forests and agricultural crops become more productive?

All the CO2 in the atmosphere has been created by outgassing from the Earth’s core during massive volcanic eruptions. This was much more prevalent in the early history of the Earth when the core was hotter than it is today. During the past 150 million years there has not been enough addition of CO2 to the atmosphere to offset the gradual losses due to burial in sediments.

Let’s look at where all the carbon is in the world, and how it is moving around.

Today, at just over 400 ppm CO2 there are 850 billion tons of CO2 in the atmosphere. By comparison, when modern life-forms evolved over 500 million years ago there was nearly 15,000 billion tons of CO2 in the atmosphere, 17 times today’s level. Plants and soils combined contain more than 2,000 billion tons of carbon, more that twice as much as the entire global atmosphere. The oceans contain 38,000 billion tons of dissolved CO2, 45 times as much as in the atmosphere. Fossil fuels, which were made from plants that pulled CO2 from the atmosphere account for 5,000 – 10,000 billion tons of carbon, 6 – 12 times as much carbon as is in the atmosphere.

But the truly stunning number is the amount of carbon that has been sequestered from the atmosphere and turned into carbonaceous rocks. 100,000,000 billion tons, that’s one quadrillion tons of carbon, have been turned into stone by marine species that learned to make armour-plating for themselves by combining calcium and carbon into calcium carbonate. Limestone, chalk, and marble are all of life origin and amount to 99.9% of all the carbon ever present in the global atmosphere. The white cliffs of Dover are made of the calcium carbonate skeletons of coccolithophores, tiny marine phytoplankton.

The vast majority of the carbon dioxide that originated in the atmosphere has been sequestered and stored quite permanently in carbonaceous rocks where it cannot be used as food by plants.

Beginning 540 million years ago at the beginning of the Cambrian Period many marine species of invertebrates evolved the ability to control calcification and to build armour plating to protect their soft bodies. Shellfish such as clams and snails, corals, coccolithofores (phytoplankton) and foraminifera (zooplankton) began to combine carbon dioxide with calcium and thus to remove carbon from the life cycle as the shells sank into sediments; 100,000,000 billion tons of carbonaceous sediment. It is ironic that life itself, by devising a protective suit of armour, determined its own eventual demise by continuously removing CO2 from the atmosphere. This is carbon sequestration and storage writ large. These are the carbonaceous sediments that form the shale deposits from which we are fracking gas and oil today. And I add my support to those who say, “OK UK, get fracking”.

The past 150 million years has seen a steady drawing down of CO2 from the atmosphere. There are many components to this but what matters is the net effect, a removal on average of 37,000 tons of carbon from the atmosphere every year for 150 million years. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere was reduced by about 90% during this period. This means that volcanic emissions of CO2 have been outweighed by the loss of carbon to calcium carbonate sediments on a multi-million year basis.

If this trend continues CO2 will inevitably fall to levels that threaten the survival of plants, which require a minimum of 150 ppm to survive. If plants die all the animals, insects, and other invertebrates that depend on plants for their survival will also die.

How long will it be at the present level of CO2 depletion until most or all of life on Earth is threatened with extinction by lack of CO2 in the atmosphere?

During this Pleistocene Ice Age, CO2 tends to reach a minimum level when the successive glaciations reach their peak. During the last glaciation, which peaked 18,000 years ago, CO2 bottomed out at 180 ppm, extremely likely the lowest level CO2 has been in the history of the Earth. This is only 30 ppm above the level that plants begin to die. Paleontological research has demonstrated that even at 180 ppm there was a severe restriction of growth as plants began to starve. With the onset of the warmer interglacial period CO2 rebounded to 280 ppm. But even today, with human emissions causing CO2 to reach 400 ppm plants are still restricted in their growth rate, which would be much higher if CO2 were at 1000-2000 ppm.

Here is the shocking news. If humans had not begun to unlock some of the carbon stored as fossil fuels, all of which had been in the atmosphere as CO2 before sequestration by plants and animals, life on Earth would have soon been starved of this essential nutrient and would begin to die. Given the present trends of glaciations and interglacial periods this would likely have occurred less than 2 million years from today, a blink in nature’s eye, 0.05% of the 3.5 billion-year history of life.

No other species could have accomplished the task of putting some of the carbon back into the atmosphere that was taken out and locked in the Earth’s crust by plants and animals over the millennia. This is why I honour James Lovelock in my lecture this evening. Jim was for many years of the belief that humans are the one-and-only rogue species on Gaia, destined to cause catastrophic global warming. I enjoy the Gaia hypothesis but I am not religious about it and for me this was too much like original sin. It was as if humans were the only evil species on the Earth.

But James Lovelock has seen the light and realized that humans may be part of Gaia’s plan, and he has good reason to do so. And I honour him because it takes courage to change your mind after investing so much of your reputation on the opposite opinion. Rather than seeing humans as the enemies of Gaia, Lovelock now sees that we may be working with Gaia to “stave of another ice age”, or major glaciation. This is much more plausible than the climate doom-and gloom scenario because our release of CO2 back into the atmosphere has definitely reversed the steady downward slide of this essential food for life, and hopefully may reduce the chance that the climate will slide into another period of major glaciation. We can be certain that higher levels of CO2 will result in increased plant growth and biomass. We really don’t know whether or not higher levels of CO2 will prevent or reduce the eventual slide into another major glaciation. Personally I am not hopeful for this because the long-term history just doesn’t support a strong correlation between CO2 and temperature.

It does boggle the mind in the face of our knowledge that the level of CO2 has been steadily falling that human CO2 emissions are not universally acclaimed as a miracle of salvation. From direct observation we already know that the extreme predictions of CO2’s impact on global temperature are highly unlikely given that about one-third of all our CO2 emissions have been discharged during the past 18 years and there has been no statistically significant warming. And even if there were some additional warming that would surely be preferable to the extermination of all or most species on the planet.

You heard it here. “Human emissions of carbon dioxide have saved life on Earth from inevitable starvation and extinction due to lack of CO2”. To use the analogy of the Atomic Clock, if the Earth were 24 hours old we were at 38 seconds to midnight when we reversed the trend towards the End Times. If that isn’t good news I don’t know what is. You don’t get to stave off Armageddon every day.

I issue a challenge to anyone to provide a compelling argument that counters my analysis of the historical record and the prediction of CO2 starvation based on the 150 million year trend. Ad hominem arguments about “deniers” need not apply. I submit that much of society has been collectively misled into believing that global CO2 and temperature are too high when the opposite is true for both. Does anyone deny that below 150 ppm CO2 that plants will die? Does anyone deny that the Earth has been in a 50 million-year cooling period and that this Pleistocene Ice Age is one of the coldest periods in the history of the planet?

If we assume human emissions have to date added some 200 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere, even if we ceased using fossil fuels today we have already bought another 5 million years for life on earth. But we will not stop using fossil fuels to power our civilization so it is likely that we can forestall plant starvation for lack of CO2 by at least 65 million years. Even when the fossil fuels have become scarce we have the quadrillion tons of carbon in carbonaceous rocks, which we can transform into lime and CO2 for the manufacture of cement. And we already know how to do that with solar energy or nuclear energy. This alone, regardless of fossil fuel consumption, will more than offset the loss of CO2 due to calcium carbonate burial in marine sediments. Without a doubt the human species has made it possible to prolong the survival of life on Earth for more than 100 million years. We are not the enemy of nature but its salvation.

As a postscript I would like to make a few comments about the other side of the alleged dangerous climate change coin, our energy policy, in particular the much maligned fossil fuels; coal, oil, and natural gas.

Depending how it’s tallied, fossil fuels account for between 85-88% of global energy consumption and more than 95% of energy for the transport of people and goods, including our food.

Earlier this year the leaders of the G7 countries agreed that fossil fuels should be phased out by 2100, a most bizarre development to say the least. Of course no intelligent person really believes this will happen but it is a testament to the power of the elites that have converged around the catastrophic human-caused climate change that so many alleged world leaders must participate in the charade. How might we convince them to celebrate CO2 rather than to denigrate it?

A lot of nasty things are said about fossil fuels even though they are largely responsible for our longevity, our prosperity, and our comfortable lifestyles.

Hydrocarbons, the energy components of fossil fuels, are 100% organic, as in organic chemistry. They were produced by solar energy in ancient seas and forests. When they are burned for energy the main products are water and CO2, the two most essential foods for life. And fossil fuels are by far the largest storage battery of direct solar energy on Earth. Nothing else comes close except nuclear fuel, which is also solar in the sense that it was produced in dying stars.

Today, Greenpeace protests Russian and American oil rigs with 3000 HP diesel-powered ships and uses 200 HP outboard motors to board the rigs and hang anti-oil plastic banners made with fossil fuels. Then they issue a media release telling us we must “end our addiction to oil”. I wouldn’t mind so much if Greenpeace rode bicycles to their sailing ships and rowed their little boats into the rigs to hang organic cotton banners. We didn’t have an H-bomb on board the boat that sailed on the first Greenpeace campaign against nuclear testing.

Some of the world’s oil comes from my native country in the Canadian oil sands of northern Alberta. I had never worked with fossil fuel interests until I became incensed with the lies being spread about my country’s oil production in the capitals of our allies around the world. I visited the oil sands operations to find out for myself what was happening there.

It is true it’s not a pretty sight when the land is stripped bare to get at the sand so the oil can be removed from it. Canada is actually cleaning up the biggest natural oil spill in history, and making a profit from it. The oil was brought to the surface when the Rocky Mountains were thrust up by the colliding Pacific Plate. When the sand is returned back to the land 99% of the so-called “toxic oil” has been removed from it.

Anti-oil activists say the oil-sands operations are destroying the boreal forest of Canada. Canada’s boreal forest accounts for 10% of all the world’s forests and the oil-sands area is like a pimple on an elephant by comparison. By law, every square inch of land disturbed by oil-sands extraction must be returned to native boreal forest. When will cities like London, Brussels, and New York that have laid waste to the natural environment be returned to their native ecosystems?

The art and science of ecological restoration, or reclamation as it is called in the mining industry, is a well-established practice. The land is re-contoured, the original soil is put back, and native species of plants and trees are established. It is possible, by creating depressions where the land was flat, to increase biodiversity by making ponds and lakes where wetland plants, insects, and waterfowl can become established in the reclaimed landscape.

The tailings ponds where the cleaned sand is returned look ugly for a few years but are eventually reclaimed into grasslands. The Fort McKay First Nation is under contract to manage a herd of bison on a reclaimed tailings pond. Every tailings pond will be reclaimed in a similar manner when operations have been completed.

As an ecologist and environmentalist for more than 45 years this is good enough for me. The land is disturbed for a blink of an eye in geological time and is then returned to a sustainable boreal forest ecosystem with cleaner sand. And as a bonus we get the fuel to power our weed-eaters, scooters, motorcycles, cars, trucks, buses, trains, and aircraft.

To conclude, carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is the stuff of life, the staff of life, the currency of life, indeed the backbone of life on Earth.

I am honoured to have been chosen to deliver your annual lecture.

Thank you for listening to me this evening.

I hope you have seen CO2 from a new perspective and will join with me to Celebrate CO2!

--- --- ---


Myndband sem nefnist

Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout
Dr Patrick Moore

Erindi flutt rstefnu ICCC
International Conference on Climate Change
8. jl 2014

Spurningar sem f verur svar vi ur en rtt verur um langtmaleigu Grmsstum Fjllum...


ur en Grmsstair Fjllum vera leigir tlendingi til 40 ra, ea 99 ra eins og hann vill sjlfur, urfa nokkur atrii a liggja skrt fyrir. arna er um 300 ferklmetra af landsvi jari hlendisins a ra, annig a etta er ml sem snertir alla slendinga.
300 ferklmetrar eru 30 sund hektarar.

g tri ekki ru en svr vi neangreindum spurningum liggi fyrir. g neita a tra v a menn geti veri svo miklir kjnar a ana t samninga n ess a skoa mli. v ska g eftir a ailar sem starfa fyrir okkur tmabundi vi stjrn lands og sveitarflaga upplsi okkur n egar um a sem eir vita. Menn vera einnig a gera sr grein fyrir a munnlegir samningar vi tlendinga um hva til stendur a gera hafa ekkert gildi, eir vera a vera skriflegir og liggja fyrir ur en rtt er um langtmaleigu.

1) Er vita hverju er tlunin er a fjrfesta, en rtt hefur veri um 20 milljara krna fjrfestingu?

2) ljsar fregnir eru af hteli og golfvelli, en slkt kostar ekki nema brot af 20 milljrunum.

3) Mun essum fjrmunum vera eytt hr innanlands, ea er a miklu leyti um a ra fjrmagn sem nota verur til a kaupa efni og vrur erlendis?

4) Vera inaarmenn, tknimenn og verkamenn, sem starfa munu vi framkvmdina, a strstum hluta slenskir, ea vera eir a mestu tlendingar?

5) Vera starfsmenn htelsins, golfvallarins og alls hins sem koma skal, slendingar, ea vera eir flestir fluttir inn?

6) Veri starfsmennirnir knverskir, hve margir vera eir?

7) Hvernig munu starfmennirnir ba? Verur reist orp svinu fyrir ea hhsi/bablokk?

8) Heyrst hefur a reikna s me flugvelli Grmsstum, vntanlega til a flytja feramenn til og fr landinu. Er a rtt?

9) Ef flugvllur verur gerur tengslum vi helsamstuna, hver mun sinna tollgslu og landamraeftirliti, ..m. Schengen eftirliti? Hver mun kosta a?

10) Er htta a essi hugsanlegi flugvllur trufli rfakyrr hlendisins?

11) urfa framkvmdir essum 30.000 hektara lands a fara umhverfismat?

12) Hefur Umhverfisruneyti og Umhverfisstofnun ekki ungar hyggjur af essu mli sem fylgja munu ltt afturkrfar framkvmdir jari hlendisins?

13) Hafa Nttruverndarsamtk ekki hyggjur af run mla? Landvernd?

14) Er htta a leigutaki muni hindra umfer feramanna um essa 30 sund hektara lands? a vri vntanlega lglegt, en hva kynni mnnum a detta hug...

15) Gerir vntanlegur leigutaki sr grein fyrir eim reglum og skyldum sem gilda hr landi m.a. jara- og balgum, t.d. varandi smlun fjr og arar skyldur vi samflagi?

16) Er htta grarlegu slysi eins og egar knverskir athafnamenn tluu sr stra hluti Kalmar Svj ri 2006, en allt fr vaskinn eins og hlfbygg hs og opnir hsgrunnar bera fagurt vitni um? (Sj hr, hr, hr, hr, hr). Kalmar lru menn drkeypta lexu, og gtum vi lrt miki af reynslu Sva. Snska rkissjnvarpinu var snd heimildarmynd um etta furulega ml, og er vonandi a RV snir mynd sem allra fyrst. Sj Kineserna Kommer.

17) Er essi vntanlegi samningur um langtmaleigu fordmisgefandi?

18) Hafa menn lesi varnaaror Dr. gsts Valfells sem eitt sinn var forstumaur Almannavarna rkisins og lengi prfessor kjarnorkuverkfri vi bandarskan hskla? Hafa menn hugleitt innihald greinarinnar? Grein hans nefnist Gangi hgt um gleinnar dyr, og birtist 13. desember s.l. Sj hr.

19) Mun vntanlegur leigutaki krafinn um tryggingar fyrir v a einu og llu veri fari eftir eim lgum, reglum og venjum sem gilda slandi?

20) Sjlfsagt hef g gleymt einhverjum spurningum, - eim m bta vi seinna...


Vibtarspurningar sem komi hafa fram athugasemdum og var. (Ef til vill verur fleiri atrium btt vi hr ef sta er til):

21) Hva gerist a 40 (ea 99) rum linum ea egar samningnum lkur? Hvernig verur me mannvirkin og allt raski?

Verur skilyrt samningnum a leigutaki skili landinu sama standi og hann tk vi v?

Ea, arf landeigandi etv. a leysa til sn ll mannvirkin og greia fyrir? Munum a etta eru 20 milljarar sem veri er a ra um og landeigandinn (sveitarflagi) gti urft a borga. a arf v a gta sn egar og ef samningur er gerur.

22) Hver ber kostna af vegager og gatnager, arennsli og frrennsli, rafmagni o..h. Hva um lgslu ? Er a rki ea sveitarflg sem sem tekur ann hluta a sr eins og oftast er gert r fyrir?

23) a er ljst a fjlda starfsmanna arf til a starfa vi htel, golfvelli o.fl. sem tilheyra 20 milljara fjrfestingunni Grmsstum. Vntanlega munu flestir ba stanum, srstaklega ljsi ess a samgngur essum landshluta geta veri erfiar a vetri til. Hver mun reka grunnjnustu vi bana, svo sem leikskla, grunnskla, heilsugslu...? Lknisjnusta vi htelgesti? Lendir etta allt sveitarflaginu? - Ea er reikna me a etta veri allt saman knverskt orp, eins konar Chinatown?

24) Vetur eru harir essum slum. Munu koma fram auknar krfur um a vegakerfinu s haldi opnu? Hver mun bera kostna af v?

25) Hefur utanrkisruneyti lti kanna hvort slenskum athafnamnnum standi til boa a taka leigu ea kaupa 0,3% af Kna?

N getur auvita vel veri a allar hliar essa mls hafi veri skoaar og skjalfestar, og a allt s lagi. Ef svo er, ber vikomandi yfirvldum a sjlfsgu skylda a upplsa okkur um a.

Ef svar vi llum essum spurningum liggur ekki fyrir, verur a afla eirra skriflega ur en rtt verur um langtmaleigu hinu 30.000 hektara landi Grmsstum Fjllum.

Um a hljta allir sannir slendingar a vera sammla.

Hitt er svo anna ml a a getur veri erfitt a taka "rtta" kvrun svona flknu mli. a eru til aferir sem auvelda slkt, en essum bloggpistlum hafa einmitt tvr slkar aferir veri kynntar.

nnur aferin nefist slensku nefnist aferin SVT greining. (Styrkur, Veikleiki, gnun, Tkifri), en ensku Ensku SWOT analysis. (Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, Threat). essi einfalda aferi var kynnt essum bloggpistli um Icesave mli.

Svo er til enn flugri httugreining sem kynnt var rum bloggpistli um Icesave mli snum tma. essi aferafri getur nst llum vel egar eir standa frammi fyrir kvaranatku ar sem mli er sni og httur margar og mismunandi. Sama hvort a er fjrmlum, framkvmdum ea stjrnmlum. Sama hvort a er jflaginu, vinnustanum ea einkalfinu. Hn er notu vi strframkvmdir og jafnvel notu af inginu og runeytum stralu.

Bar essar aferir gtu nst vel eim sem urfa a fjalla um framkvmdir eins og r sem komi hafa til greina Grmsstum.


Tv- ea rsmelli mynd til a stkka og lesa grein.
Gangi hgt um gleinnar dyr.

a er fyrir llu! Huang fagni ekki of snemma
Tilkynna um vieigandi tengingu vi frtt
Skrr tengdar essari bloggfrslu:

Grein Nature: Kenning Henriks Svensmark um hrif geimgeisla og slvirkni skjafar virist hafa veri stafest hj CERN...


hinu ekkta ritrnda vsindariti Nature birtist dag grein um niurstur tilraunarinnar CLOUD hj CERN Sviss. Niursturnar eru mjg jkvar fyrir kenninguna um samspil geimgeisla, virkni slar og skjafars.

Til hamingju Henrik Svensmark!

Sj frtt sem birtist vefsu Nature dag:

Cloud formation may be linked to cosmic rays

Experiment probes connection between climate change and radiation bombarding the atmosphere.

It sounds like a conspiracy theory: 'cosmic rays' from deep space might be creating clouds in Earth's atmosphere and changing the climate. Yet an experiment at CERN, Europe's high-energy physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland, is finding tentative evidence for just that.

The findings, published today in Nature1, are preliminary, but they are stoking a long-running argument over the role of radiation from distant stars in altering the climate....

Meira hr.


rdrtt r greininni m lesa hr vefsu Nature:

Role of sulphuric acid, ammonia and galactic cosmic rays in atmospheric aerosol nucleation


Atmospheric aerosols exert an important influence on climate1 through their effects on stratiform cloud albedo and lifetime2 and the invigoration of convective storms3. Model calculations suggest that almost half of the global cloud condensation nuclei in the atmospheric boundary layer may originate from the nucleation of aerosols from trace condensable vapours4, although the sensitivity of the number of cloud condensation nuclei to changes of nucleation rate may be small5, 6. Despite extensive research, fundamental questions remain about the nucleation rate of sulphuric acid particles and the mechanisms responsible, including the roles of galactic cosmic rays and other chemical species such as ammonia7. Here we present the first results from the CLOUD experiment at CERN. We find that atmospherically relevant ammonia mixing ratios of 100 parts per trillion by volume, or less, increase the nucleation rate of sulphuric acid particles more than 100–1,000-fold. Time-resolved molecular measurements reveal that nucleation proceeds by a base-stabilization mechanism involving the stepwise accretion of ammonia molecules. Ions increase the nucleation rate by an additional factor of between two and more than ten at ground-level galactic-cosmic-ray intensities, provided that the nucleation rate lies below the limiting ion-pair production rate. We find that ion-induced binary nucleation of H2SO4–H2O can occur in the mid-troposphere but is negligible in the boundary layer. However, even with the large enhancements in rate due to ammonia and ions, atmospheric concentrations of ammonia and sulphuric acid are insufficient to account for observed boundary-layer nucleation.

Meira hr.

Hr er um a ra fangaskrslu, og tilraunum ekki loki. a er vissulega ngjulegt egar menn sj rangur erfiis sns. a er rtt og skylt a draga ekki neinar lyktanir strax, v fst or hafa minnsta byrg... a er htt a segja a etta s verulega hugavert og spennandi...

Var einhver a hvsla, tli Henrik Svensmark eigi eftir a f Nbelsverlaunin elisfri? Hver veit? :-)



Eldri pistlar um kenningu Henriks Svensmark:

Er jrin a hitna? Ekki er allt sem snist... 1. febrar 1998.

Merkileg tilraun: Geimgeislar, sk og loftslagsbreytingar
... 1. janar 2007.

Byltingarkennd kenning dansks vsindamanns skekur vsindaheiminn....
20. feb. 2007.

Njar frttir af Svensmark tilrauninni hj CERN Sviss...
8. jn 2009

N grein Henriks Svensmark um loftslagsbreytingar af vldum slar og geimgeisla birt Geophysical Research Letters dag 1. gst...
1. gst 2009.

Prfessor Henrik Svensmark: Vi anbefalervores venner at nyde den globale opvarmning, mens den varer... 11. september 2009.

N tilraun vi rsarhskla rennir stoum undir kennirnar Henriks Svensmarks um hrif geimgeisla og slar skjafar - og ar me vntanlega hnatthlnun ea hnattklnun... 5. jn 2011.


Nokkrar krkjur:

Cosmic rays get ahead in CLOUD

Cloud formation may be linked to cosmic rays

Svensmarks klimateori fr rygstd fra Cern

Probing the cosmic-ray–climate link

Klimaforschung am Teilchenbeschleuniger: Beschreibung der Aerosolneubildung muss revidiert werden

CERN experiment confirms cosmic ray action

--- --- ---


Uppfrt 30.8.2011:

egar greinin sjlf er lesin kemur ljs a hn er alls ekki n. Hn er send Nature 9. september 2010, og vntanlega skrifu nokkru ur, ea fyrir meira en ri.
"Received 9 September 2010; accepted 24 June 2011".

CLOUD tilrauninni hj CERN er alls ekki loki enn.

Uppfrt 1.9.2011:

Prfessor dr. Nir Shaviv skrifar dag grein hr sem vert er a lesa. Hann er einstaklega vel a sr loftslagsfrum, og v vert a veita athygli hvaa skoun hann hefur.

Greinin byrjar annig: "The CLOUD collaboration from CERN finally had their results published in Nature (TRF, full PDF), showing that ionization increases the nucleation rate of condensation nuclei. The results are very beautiful and they demonstrate, yet again, how cosmic rays (which govern the amount of atmospheric ionization) can in principle have an effect on climate.

What do I mean? First, it is well known that solar variability has a large effect on climate. In fact, the effect can be quantified and shown to be 6 to 7 times larger than one could naively expect from just changes in the total solar irradiance. This was shown by using the oceans as a huge calorimeter (e.g., as described
here). Namely, an amplification mechanism must be operating.

One mechanism which was suggested, and which now has ample evidence supporting it, is that of solar modulation of the cosmic ray flux (CRF), known to govern the amount of atmospheric ionization. This in turn modifies the formation of cloud condensation nuclei, thereby changing the cloud characteristics (e.g. their reflectivity and lifetime). For a few year old summary, take a look here.

So, how do we know that this mechanism is necessarily working? ...". [MEIRA]

hugavert myndband me Nir Shaviv er hr. Myndbandi er fr rinu 2010.

(Er ekki annars merkilegt hve sumir (margir?) hafa miklar hyggjur af v a
kenningar Svensmarks reynist rttar...
Auvita ttu allir a glejast ef svo reynist, v vri ljst a
hlnun undanfarinna ratuga s a miklu (mestu?) leyti a vldum nttrulegra breytinga,
og v vntanlega eftir a ganga til baka.
geta menn fari a anda rlega aftur, ea anda me nefinu eins og sagt er...).

N grein breskra vsindamanna spir kldum vetrum Bretlandseyjum...



dag 5. jl birtist tmaritinu Environmental Research Letters grein sem vekur nokkurn hroll. Greinin nefnist "The solar influence on the probability of relatively cold UK winters in the future". Tamriti er gefi t af IOP-Institute of Physics

Greinin, sem er eftir prfessor Mike Lockwood hj Reading hskla o.fl., er agengileg hr:

N virist vera ljst a virkni slar verur llu minni nstu ratugina en hn hefur veri undanfarna ratugi. essari nju grein eru lkur kldum vetrum Bretlandseyjum nstu ratugina reiknaar t.

Sami hpur vsindamanna hj University of Reading tengdi sasta ri kalda vetur Bretlandi undanfrnum ldum vi litla slvirkni, og spi a nstunni gti minnkandi slvirkni leitt til kaldari vetra, jafnvel eins kaldra og voru mean Maunder lgmarkinu st fr um 1645 til 1715, en var verulega kalt Evrpu, svo kalt a ykkur s var iulega nni Thames.

essari nju rannskn hafa vsindamennirnir liti til virkni slar sastliin 9300 r. Vsindamnnunum reiknast til a lkurnar kuldaskeii Bretlandi sem er sambrilegt vi a sem var mean Maunder lgmarkinu st su 1:10 ea 10%.

Sj frtt fr v dag hr vefsu IOP - Institute of Physics: "...Over the next 50 years, the researchers show that the probability of the Sun returning to Maunder minimum conditions is about 10 per cent, raising the chances that the average winter temperature will fall below
2.5 oC to around 1 in 7, assuming all other factors, including man-made effects and El Nio remain constant. ..."

vsindagreininni er fjalla um hitafar nstu ratugina Bretlandi. Greinin fjallar ekki um hugsanleg hnattrn hrif og ekki um hrifin slandi. ar verum vi a lta myndunarafli duga... Vi getum rifja upp a mjg va heiminum var mjg kalt mean Maunder lgmarkinu st, og einnig slandi:

r Jakobsson fjallai um etta erindi snu Oddastefnu 1995 "Um hafs fyrir Suurlandi - fr landnmi til essa dags" og vitnai annla:

"1695. vanalega miklir hafsar. s rak um veturinn upp a Norurlandi og l hann fram um ing, noranveur rku sinn austur fyrir og svo suur, var hann kominn fyrir orlkshfn fyrir sumarml og sunnudaginn fyrstan sumri (14. aprl) rak hann fyrir Reykjanes og Gar og inn fiskileitir Seltirninga og a lokum a Hvalseyjum og Htars, fr hann inn hverja vk. Hafi s ei komi fyrir Suurnes innan 80 ra, tti v mrgum nstrlegt og undrum gegna um komu hans. mtti ganga sum af Akranesi Hlmakaupsta (Reykjavk) og var sinn Faxafla fram um vertarlok rmlega, braut hann skip undan 6 mnnum fyrir Gari, en eir gengu allir til lands".

N, hvernig skpunum stendur v a aeins er reikna me klnun Bretlandseyjum takt vi minnkandi virkni slar? Er blessari slinni svona illa vi Breta? Varla. Lklega er skringin s a hitaferillinn sem eir notuu nr eingngu til Englands, en a er hinn margfrgi Central England Temperature (CET) hitaferill sem nr aftur til rsins 1659, en hann snir lofthita mldan me mlitkjum samfellt allt aftur til rsins 1659, og er v s hitaferill hitamla sem sem nr yfir lengst tmabil. a er einfaldlega ekki kostur sambrilegum mlingum utan Bretlands.


Af essu mli hljta allir skynsamir menn a hafa nokkrar hyggjur. Arir brosa bara kampinn. Vi munum eftir hrifunum sem harir vetur t.d. Bretlandi hfu samgngur sastlina tvo vetur. a voru bara smmunir. Veri sumur einnig kld, er auvita htt vi uppskerubresti me hrra veri matvlum, annig a hinir efnaminni gtu lii skort og hungurvofan etv. ekki langt undan... Skynsamt flk hefur alltaf Plan-B og gerir r fyrir a mlin geti snist mnnum hag. Treystir ekki bara gu og lukkuna. Siglir ekki einhverri sluvmu a feigarsi... "etta reddast einhvernvegin", - er a n alveg vst? Vi skulum vona hi besta og ekki leggjast unglyndi alveg strax... Ekki er lklegt a bresk stjrnvld hafi ennan mguleika klnun huga, srstaklega eftir standi ar landi tvo undanfarna vetur.

samantekt greinarinnar stendur:

Recent research has suggested that relatively cold UK winters are more common when solar activity is low (Lockwood et al 2010 Environ. Res. Lett. 5 024001).

Solar activity during the current sunspot minimum has fallen to levels unknown since the start of the 20th century (Lockwood 2010 Proc. R. Soc. A 466 303–29) and records of past solar variations inferred from cosmogenic isotopes (Abreu et al 2008 Geophys. Res. Lett. 35 L20109) and geomagnetic activity data (Lockwood et al 2009 Astrophys. J. 700 937–44) suggest that the current grand solar maximum is coming to an end and hence that solar activity can be expected to continue to decline.

Combining cosmogenic isotope data with the long record of temperatures measured in central England, we estimate how solar change could influence the probability in the future of further UK winters that are cold, relative to the hemispheric mean temperature, if all other factors remain constant. Global warming is taken into account only through the detrending using mean hemispheric temperatures. We show that some predictive skill may be obtained by including the solar effect.

Nnar hr:
Greinin ll er ar agengileg sem pdf og html.

silg Thames London ri 1677

Sraeinfld httugreining vegna ICESAVE...


Ftt er eins mikilvgt essa dagana og a velja "rtt" ICESAVE kosningunni. Hva er rtt er svo auvita mat hvers og eins, en vandamli er a etta er flkin millirkjadeila og afleiingarnar af rngu vali geta ori afdrifarkar fyrir land og j.

v miur er mli a flki a fstir hafa yfirsn. Sj ekki skginn fyrir trjnum.

Fyrir nokkrum dgum var kynnt afer sem miki er notu vi httugreiningu og httumat. Sj pistilinn Icesave og httugreining - Ea rssnesk rletta...?

Hr kynnt sraeinfld afer sem oft er mjg mikil hjlp egar meta skal hva ljs framtin ber skauti sr, til dmis egar kvaranir eru teknar fjrmlum, svo sem vi kaup fyrirtki, b ea jafnvel bara bl. Auvita er ICESAVE enn strra og flknara ml, en vali er sett hendur almennings svo nausynlegt a hver og einn s sttur vi hvort vali s J ea Nei, og taki san yfirvegaa afstu.

essi afer kallast Ensku SWOT analysis. (Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, Threat).

slensku nefnist aferin SVT greining. (Styrkur, Veikleiki, gnun, Tkifri).

SVT greiningu er hgt a nota mismunandi htt. Hr er tlunin a beita henni ICESAVE vandamli annig a vi fum yfirsn. Sjum skginn fyrir trjnum. a vntanlega eftir a koma vart hve auvelt a er.

Hugmyndin er a greina nverandi stand og standi framtinni me v a fylla t einfalt eyubla. ar sem mguleikarnir eru strum drttum tveir, hentar vel a nota tv eyubl, anna fyrir vali ICESAVE: J og hitt fyrir ICESAVE: NEI. Eyublin m skja near sunni.

egar eyublin hafa veri fyllt t er myndin orin mun skrari og vali auveldara. Margt sem byrjun virtist ljst og okukennt blasir n vi. Ekkert brjstvit ea "af v bara" stjrnar okkur lengur. Vali er yfirvega og vi erum stt vi kvrun okkar.


rstuttar leibeiningar:

Vi byrjum a fylla t efri hluta blasins sem lsir nverandi standi, .e. styrkleikum og veikleikum samflagsins eins og a kemur okkur fyrir sjnir nna.

San fyllum vi t neri hluta eyublasins sem lsir standi samflagsins nokkrum mnuum ea rum eftir a rslitin liggja fyrir. Vi reynum a sj fyrir tkifri sem bjast og gnir sem kunna a ba okkar.

ar sem framtin rst af v hvort niurstaa kosninganna verur J ea Nei notum vi tv eyubl, anna fyrir J og hitt fyrir Nei. Efri hlutinn verur eins, en neri hlutinn mismunandi.

Mikilvgt er a nota stuttar lsandi setningar, jafnvel stikkor ea upptalningu. Engar langlokur. Gott er a hafa hvert atrii sinni lnu, v annig verur yfirsnin betri.

a m til dmis geyma skjali skjbori tlvunnar og fylla a t ar, ea einfaldlega prenta a t og nota blant....

Um er a ra sfnun hugmynda til a setja reitina. Myndin efst sunni snir hvernig gott er a vinna verkefni hp, en er beitt hugarflugsaferinni (brain storm) og byrja a skrifa hugmyndir lmmia sem settir eru strt SVT bla.

Vi verum a skoa mli fr msum sjrnarhornum og jafnvel klfa upp sjnarhla til a f yfirsn. Fyrr sjum vi ekki skginn fyrir trjnum.

Dmi um atrii sem mtti hafa huga vi vinnsluna:
Atvinnustandi heilbrigiskerfi, sklakerfi, menningin, launakerfi mia vi ngrannalnd, run gengis krnunnar, innista rotabi Landsbankans, staa meal ngrannaja, agengi a lnamrkuum, fjrfestingar erlendra aila hrlendis, ESA og EFTA dmstllinn, almenn hagsld ea vansld, o.s.frv. …
Hvernig viljum vi a samflagi veri eftir fein r?
Hverjar eru htturnar?
Getur glannaskapur ori drkeyptur?

etta er ekki flki, en kostar sm umhugsun. egar vi hfum loki vi a fylla t eyublin, sjum vi framtina mun betur fyrir okkur og urfum ekki a velta lengur fyrir okkur hvernig vi kjsum.

Vonandi hefur essi pistill komi einhverjum a gagni vi a rata um refilstigu Icesave mlsins. Okkur hefur veri fali a skera r um a me atkvagreislu hvor leiin s ruggari og httuminni fyrir samflagi, J=samningsleiin ea NEI=dmstlaleiin. a er v eins gott a hugsa mli gaumgfilega og kjsa "rtt".

Eyubla fyrir SVT greiningu er hr sem Word skjal

og hr sem PDF skjal.

Pistillinn Icesave og httugreining - Ea rssnesk rletta...?

Upplsingasa Fjrmlaruneytisins

Vilhjlmur orsteinsson: Icesave sett fram myndrnt

Framt slands og fjregg jarinnar er okkar hndum
Ltum skynsemina ra

Skrr tengdar essari bloggfrslu:

Icesave og httugreining - Ea rssnesk rletta...?


Ekki verur tekin afstaa me ea mti Icesave essum pistli, heldur kynnt einfld aferafri sem getur nst eim sem vilja bera sama htturnar af v a kjsa J ea NEI.

a er ljst a mrg ljn geta veri veginum hvor leiin sem verur valin. Ljnin eru mrg og lvs, og v erfitt a tta sig eim. Mli er flki og htturnar mismunandi. a er v mikilvgt a vali s yfirvega og byggt rkum, og san s kostur valinn ar sem afleiingar yru minni ef eitthva fer rskeiis. Vi ltum okkur sem skynsamt flk og viljum velja lei sem er httuminnst fyrir okkur og brn okkar, en ekki nota glannaskap httufkilsins sem er me „a reddast" hugarfari. Vi veljum illskrri kostinn. a verur san a vera mat hvers og eins hvor kosturinn er skrri, ea illskrri.

essi aferafri getur einnig nst llum vel egar eir standa frammi fyrir kvaranatku ar sem mli er sni og httur margar og mismunandi. Sama hvort a er fjrmlum, framkvmdum ea stjrnmlum. Sama hvort a er jflaginu, vinnustanum ea einkalfinu.

etta er einfldu tgfa af httugreiningu sem menn nota miki egar rist er strar og umfangsmiklar framkvmdir, en essi einfaldaa aferafri er jafnvel notu af inginu og runeytum stralu eins og sj m essari vefsu Guidelines for Cabinet Submissions and New Policy Proposals, sj Risk Assessment miri sunni. essi aferafri hentar v, og er jafnvel notu, ar sem reynt er a lta skynsemina ra fr plitkinni.

randi er a a komi skrt fram a r „httur" sem koma fram dminu hr fyrir nean eru eingngu settar fram til tskringar, og httumati er vali annig a dreifingin veri annig a auveldara s a skra t aferafrina.

a eru til msar aferir vi httugreiningu (risk analysis), en s sem kynnt er hr er einfld, aulr, myndrn og rangursrk.

Ekki veit g hvort mr tekst a kynna essa gu aferafri svo gagn s af. bendingar eru auvita vel egnar.

Fimm mntna nmskei:

Hvernig fer svona httugreining fram?

Aferin sem kynnt er hr er mjg einfld, krefst ltillar kunnttu , en er einstaklega g til a meta httu af einhverri kvaranatku og taka skynsamlega mlunum, srstaklega egar mli er sni og afleiingar af rngu mati og rangri kvaranatku geta ori drkeyptar.

g hef tbi eyubl sem eru agengileg hr fyrir nean. au eru ger Excel, en a sjlfsgu hefi alveg eins mtt nota rustrika bla ea ritvinnsluforrit til a tba eyublin.

Hr fyrir nean eru smkkaar myndir af essum eyublum felldar inn textann. ar hefur aeins veri fyllt inn au.

Eyublin er tv: Anna er fyrir ICESAVE: J og hitt fyrir ICESAVE: NEI.

rstuttu mli:

Fyrst er fyllt inn efri tfluna J eyublainu. egar v er loki eru niurstur fluttar r efri tfluna neri. s fr maur myndrnt yfirlit yfir allar httur sem maur getur s fyrir sr, og s hvort httan er sttanleg ef vali er J.

San gerir maur tilsvarandi anna eyubla fyrir vali NEI.

er httugreiningu (risk analysis) loki.

egar essu er loki getur maur fari a velta fyrir sr hvort hgt s a lgmarka httuna einhvern htt. a er httustring (risk management).

1) Efri taflan, httuflokkun:

Maur reynir a mynda sr me hugarflugs aferinni (brain storm) allar httur ea slmar afleiingar sem kvrunin um a kjsa anna hvort J ea NEI gti haft fr me sr. Til a byrja me er best a setja allt bla sem manni dettur hug, v a er alltaf hgt a fkka liunum seinna ef manni snist eir ekki eiga vi.

Dmi: Hugsum okkur augnablik a vi sum a fylla inn tfluna fyrir ICESAVE: J.

Okkur koma til hugar nokkrar httur. Setjum bara inn feinar til a skra mli. Gildin fyrir lkur og afleiingar (1...5)/(A...E) eru t lofti... Vissulega sumt kjnalegt hr, en annig m a gjarnan vera, v vi lagfrum seinna. Hr er mikilvgt a nota hugarflugs ea „brain-storm" aferina, og er miklu betra a nokkrir su saman til a varpa fram hugmyndum, t.d. fjlskyldumelimir ea vinnuflagar. „Lta allt flakka - Laga seinna".

Vi frum inn htturnar sem okkur koma hug, og metum lkur a htta reynist raunveruleg (skalinn 1...5) og hvaa afleiingar a hefi fr me sr (skalinn A...E). Vi frum essi gildi inn vikomandi dlka ar sem blu stafirnir eru.


(Auvita eru lkurnar/afleiingarnar hr bara ltt grundu dmi).

2) Neri taflan, httufylki:

Litirnir tflunni (httu fylki - risk matrix) merkja sjnrnt hvort vikomandi lkur/afleiingar su sttanlegar. Rautt er sttanlegt, grnt sttanlegt og gult eitthva sem mtti huga nnar.

Taki eftir a eftir v sem reitirnir eru ofar eru meiri lkur a vikomandi atburur eigi sr sta, og a eftir v sem reitirnir eru lengra til hgri vera afleiingarnar verri. ess vegna vera reitirnir rauari eftir v sem eir nlgast meir efstu rina og rina lengst til hgri. Almennt getum vi sagt a atburir sem lenda reitunum efst til hgri su gjrsamlega sttanlegir.

Flytjum n r dlkunum Lkur og Afleiingar (dlkarnir me blu stfunum) efri tflunni lituu reitina neri tflunni. Sumar httur lenda grnum reitum, arar gulum reitum og nokkrar rauum reitum.

N er ekki alveg vst a litavali s skynsamlegt. Vi lgum a seinna ef okkur finnst rf v...


3) httumati:

httustig reitanna httufylkinu er mismunandi:

[RAUIR REITIR]: viunandi. Hr arf virkilega a skoa mli nnar og meta vel. Sumt kann a vera gersamlega viunandi og beinlnis strhttulegt. Hva er hgt a gera til a minnka httuna?

[GULIR REITIR]: Rtt a athuga nnar v mat okkar kann a hafa veri fullngjandi.

[GRNIR REITIR]: Viunandi. arf lti a skoa.

Lendi einhver httan grnum reit, urfum vi lti a hugsa um a. Lendi httan gulum reit, er auvita rtt a gefa v gaum.

Einhverjar httur hafa lent rauum reit. N verum vi a staldra vi: Er a sttanlegt? Hva er hfi? Ef lkur eru hverfandi getur a veri sttanlegt, en ef til dmis mannslf, heilsa okkar og svo framvegis er hfi, getur vel veri a a s algerlega sttanlegt, jafnvel lkurnar su ekki mjg miklar. Framt okkar og barna okkar? Getum vi gert eitthva til a lgmarka vikomandi httu? etta verum vi a meta yfirvegaan htt.

4) egar bi eyublin, fyrir ICESAVE-J og ICESAVE-NEI hafa veri tfyllt getum vi teki rkstudda og yfirvegaa afstu, me ea mti:

Vi hldum fram a vega og meta, endurskoum mat okkar lkum og afleiingum, yfirfrum litavali httufylkinu. Mean vi erum a essu fum vi ga sn yfir verkefni og eigum auveldara me a svara j ea nei...

N erum vi bin a fara yfir allar httur sem kvrunin um a kjsa J ea kjsa NEI getur haft fr me sr. Vi hfum flokka a eftir lkum og alvarleika. Vi hfum sett niurstuna tflur sem sna okkur myndrnt hva er hfi...

Ef ljs kemur a anna hvort J ea NEI virist afgerandi ruggari lei, getum vi kosi me skynsemina a leiarljsi. Erum nokku viss okkar sk. Vi ltum ekki stjrnast af brjstvitinu einu saman ea af v sem arir segja ea bulla. Vi teljum okkur vera skynsm og viljum greia atkvi me ea mti samkvmt mevituu mati. Vi viljum lgmarka httuna.

Eins og lesendur sj, er etta einfalt og auskili. Miki vri annars gott a f svona flokkun og framsetningu fr eim sem hafa veri a fjalla um mli, .e. stjrnmlamnnum, hagfringum, lgfringum, og svo auvita okkur, Ptri og Pli...

Fyrst eir geta nota essa aferafri stralska inginu ea runeytum, og ykir a skynsamlegt, ttum vi slendingar a fara ltt me a - er ekki svo? Smile

Gangi ykkur vel!

Eyubl tveim flipum Excel skjali:

Eyubl Excel

Athugi a fyrsta flipanum eru eyubl fyrir J, rum flipa fyrir NEI og leibeiningar hinum rija. Auvita er llum heimilt a leika sr me etta skjal og breyta a vild.

Um aljastaalinn ISO / IEC 31010 Risk Management - Risk Assessment Techniques

N spyr ef til vill einhver hver mn niurstaa s. Svari er einfalt. g er farinn a hallast a kveinni niurstu, en endanleg kvrun liggur ekki fyrir. g nota tv svona eyubl, anna fyrir J og hitt fyrir NEI, og fri inn au jafnum og mr dettur eitthva hug, ea ef g rekst ntt sjnarmi ru ea riti. Litrku tflurnar, httufylkin, taka smm saman sig mynd, en a hjlpar mr a skilja betur heildarmyndina og vonandi a taka „rtta" kvrun egar a kjrborinu kemur.

Gamall vsdmur
Ekki tra neinu ef hefur bara heyrt um a.
Ekki tra neinu ef a er aeins orrmur, ea eitthva sem gengur manna milli.
Ekki tra neinu sem er num trarbkum.
Ekki tra neinu sem kennarar nir, ea eir sem eru r eldri segja r krafti valds sns.
Ekki tra aldagamlar venjur.

En, ef kemst a raun um, eftir skoun og greiningu,
a a kemur heim og saman vi heilbriga skynsemi
og leiir gott eitt af sr,
skalt metaka a og lifa samkvmt v.

---Gautama Buddha (~563 F.Kr.-~483 F.Kr.)

Skrr tengdar essari bloggfrslu:

Rafeindahernaur - Electronic Warfare - er raunveruleg gn vi innvii landsins...


Me meiri gnunum sem steja a ntmajflgum er rafeindahernaur. Er ekki tt vi tiltlulega meinlausar rsir tlvuhakkara vefsur fyrirtkja og stofnana, heldur rsir erlendra leynijnusta og jafnvel hryjuverkasamtaka innvii jflagsins, svo sem raforkuver og smakerfi.

Reyndar stendur hugtaki rafeindahernaur, ea "Electronic Warfare", fyrir tluvert breiara svi en skemmdaverk og rsir me hjlp tlvuvrusa, Trjuhesta og tlvuorma, ar sem a nr einnig yfir a a trufla radfjarskipti o.fl. me rafsegulbylgjum. etta er dauans alvara eins og t.d. essi auglsing Bandarkjahers eftir srfringum bendir til.

Hugtaki "Cyber Warfare" nr ef til vill betur yfir a sem essi pistill fjallar um. Sj umfjllun um Cyberwarfare Wikipedia hr. Mrkin milli Electronic Warfare og Cyber Warfare eru ekki skr.

Hr er eingngu tlunin a skoa mguleika rsum innvii jflagsins, svo sem raforkuframleislu og dreifingu. Einnig "nja" ger af tlvuvru sem menn eru farnir a ttast, svokallaa ksil-trjuhesta.

Hva er Trjuhestur og nnur vra tlvukerfum? Allir vita vntanlega af hverju myndin er efst sunni. Hn er af Trjuhestinum sem Grikkir smuu Trjustrinu sem geti er um grskri goafri. Sj hr. Trjuhesturinn var risastr trhestur sem grskir hermenn notuu til a smygla sr inn Trju. svipaan htt vinna svokallair Trjuhestar tlvukerfum. Trjuhestar tlvukerfum eru forrit sem komast inn tlvukerfin flskum forsendum og hgt er a nota til nnast hvers sem er egar au eru einu sinni komin inn. Hr er fjalla slensku um Trjuhesta, vrusa og orma.

0921-acyberweapon-bushehr-iran-nuclear_full_600.jpgFyrir skmmu var svona Trjuhesti beint a Bushehr kjarnorkuverinu ran. Sumir telja a sraelska leynijnustan hafi tt tt essu mli, en enginn er viss. a er vita a etta var mjg srhf vra sem beint var a tlvukerfi af eirri ger sem miki er notu inai, .e. skjkerfi og intlvur (SCADA & PLC). essi kvena vra, tlvuormur, gengur undir nafninu Stuxnet og er t.d. fjalla um hana hr vef Symantec. a fer ekki milli mla a Stuxnet hefur veri beitt eim tilgangi a rast instringar og m lesa tarlega skrslu Symantec hr. essi ormur hefur nttru a hann skrur um intlvukerfi, breytir forriti ess og felur sl sna. Sj einnig frtt um mli hj Daily Mail.

Eftirfarandi er af fyrstu og sustu sum hinnar lngu greinargerar fr Symantec, en margir ekkja fyrirtki sem framleianda hins ekkta Norton vrusvarnarforrits:

W32.Stuxnet has gained a lot of attention from researchers and media recently. There is good reason for this. Stuxnet is one of the most complex threats we have analyzed....Stuxnet is a threat that was primarily written to target an industrial control system or set of similar systems. Industrial control systems are used in gas pipelines and power plants. Its final goal is to reprogram industrial control systems (ICS) by modifying code on programmable logic controllers (PLCs) to make them work in a manner the attacker intended and to hide those changes from the operator of the equipment....The ultimate goal of Stuxnet is to sabotage that facility by reprogramming programmable logic controllers (PLCs) to operate as the attackers intend them to, most likely out of their specified boundaries.


Stuxnet represents the first of many milestones in malicious code history – it is the first to exploit four 0-day vulnerabilities, compromise two digital certificates, and inject code into industrial control systems and hide the code from the operator. Whether Stuxnet will usher in a new generation of malicious code attacks towards real-world infrastructure—overshadowing the vast majority of current attacks affecting more virtual or individual assets—or if it is a once- in-a-decade occurrence remains to be seen.

Stuxnet is of such great complexity—requiring significant resources to develop—that few attackers will be capable of producing a similar threat, to such an extent that we would not expect masses of threats of similar in sophistication to suddenly appear. However, Stuxnet has highlighted direct-attack attempts on critical infrastructure
are possible and not just theory or movie plotlines.

The real-world implications of Stuxnet are beyond any threat we have seen in the past. Despite the exciting challenge in reverse engineering Stuxnet and understanding its purpose, Stuxnet is the type of threat we hope to never see again.

N vita menn ekki hvort a var setningur a lama stjrnkerfi kjarnorkuversins, ea a etta hafi bara veri fing fyrir eitthva anna og meira. a er ljst a etta atvik hefur snt tvrtt a essi htta er raunveruleg. tiloka er a arna hafi amatrar ea hakkarar veri a verki, v eir hafa ekki nga ekkingu intlvum sem vinna allt annan htt en hefbundnar PC tlvur. arna er afer sem vinajir geta nota til a lama orkuver nnast innanfr me v a eyileggja taugakerfi eirra, ef nota m samlkingu. Ea, endurforrrita stjrnkerfi ess annig a a eyileggi sjlft sig.

ranska kjarnorkuverinu er tali a smitleiin hafi veri um USB minnislykil sem einn rssnesku tknimannanna var me. Hvernig smiti barst hann er minna vita um.


Hvernig dreifa vrur eins og ormar, vrusar og Trjuhestar sr?

Hugsanlega er algengasta aferin a dreifa vrusum me vihengjum tlvubrfa. afer ekkja flestir. Einnig eru sumar vefsur vafasamar og geta smita tlvuna me vru ef varlega er fari og tlvan er ekki me gott nlega uppfrt vrusvarnarforrit. etta vita flestir.

cpu.pngnnur afer til a dreifa svona vrum er llu hugnanlegri. Lti hefur veri fjalla um essa afer, en ljst er a margir hafa ungar hyggjur. essi vra gengur stundum undir nafninu Silicon-Trojan ea ksil-Trjuhestur.

msir hlutir tlvubna, svo sem rgjrvar, samrsir fyrir netsvissa, skjkort o.m.fl. eru framleiddir lglaunalndum hinum megin hnettinum. Made in xxx stendur essum tlvukubbum ea samrsum (integrated circuit). etta eru grarlega flknar rsir me tugsundum ea milljnum transistora og oftar en ekki me eigin tlvu og tlvuforrit. Stundum er svona forrit kalla firmware til agreiningar fr venjulegum hugbnai, ea software.

essi forrit sem bygg eru inn samrsirnar, ea tlvukubbana eins og vi kllum etta oft, geta veri grarlega str og flkin. Hve str? Jafnvel hundra sund lnur af tlvuka ea meira. a er v lti ml a koma fyrir Trjuhesti sem sm vibt vi ennan ka n ess a nokkur veri ess var. Trjuhesturinn getur san innihaldi orma og vrusa sem hgt er a hleypa t tlvuna me einhverjum lymskulegum aferum. vran blundar milljnum tlva um allan heim og bur ess a kalli komi.

Eitt mynda dmi sem gti veri raunverulegt um svona samrsir eru kubbarnir sem eru ADSL beinum sem eru flestum heimilum og skrifstofum, og tengja saman interneti og innra net heimilisins ea skrifstofunnar. ar gti Trjuhestur hglega veri fi og hsni og beinu sambandi vi hsbnda sinn einhvers staar ti heimi. egar hsbndinn kallar alheimsnetinu hott-hott allir mnir Trjuhestar rs Trjuhesturinn upp, og r innyflum hans skra tlvuormar sem fjlga sr og smita augabragi allar tlvur heimilinu, fyrirtkinu... Ekki bara einu heimili ea fyrirtki, heldur sundum ea milljnum. Taka jafnvel til vi a, eins og tilviki Stuxnet, a endurforrita stjrnkerfi orkuversins, strijunnar, smstvarinnar.... Nhggr rumskar og nagar rtur jflagsins...

Auvita gti etta veri myndun, en tknin er fyrir hendi og margir ttast a etta s veruleikinn.


Nhggr nagar rtur Yggdrasils.

trlegt? Vissulega, en margir hafa af essu miklar og ungar hyggjur. Meal eirra er Varnarmladeild strlsku rkisstjrnarinnar sem leyft hefur agang a skrslu sem fjallar um essa httu. Sj Towards Countering the Rise of the Silicon Trojan vef Australian Government-Department of Defence.

samantekt skrslunnar stendur:

australian_government.jpgThe Trojan Horse has a venerable if unwelcome history and it is still regardedby many as the primary component in Computer Network Attack.
Trojans have been the direct cause of significant economic loss over the years, and a large industry has grown to counter this insidious threat. To date, Trojans have in the vast majority taken the form of malicious software.
However, more recent times have seen the emergence of what has been dubbed by some as the “Silicon Trojan”; these trojans are embedded at the hardware level and can be designed directly into chips and devices. The complexity of the design of the device or chip in which they are embedded, coupled with the severe difficulty of evaluating increasingly dense, proprietary hardware designs, can make their discovery extremely difficult.
This paper explores the possible effectiveness of a Silicon Trojan, whether they form a credible ongoing threat, and describes possible approaches which can be used as countermeasures.

ll skrslan: Towards Countering the Rise of the Silicon Trojan

a a kvein tegund intlvukerfis hafi ori fyrir barinu er einfaldlega vegna ess a essi tegund hefur veri notu orkuverinu sem var skotmark etta sinn.


Vde fr Al Jazeera um Cyberwar (aprl 2010):


Trja brennur eftir Johann Georg Trautmann (1713-1769)

Trjuhesturinn stendur hgra megin. Vonandi eiga tlvukerfi jflagsins ekki eftir a lenda svona hremmingum me hjlp ntma Trjuhesta eins og Stuxnet.

Vonandi hefur essi pistill sannfrt einhverja um a hefbundin tlvuinnbrot sem vi frttum af anna slagi eru tiltlulega meinlaus og unnin af sjlfmenntuum amatrum ea hkkurum. Htt er vi a essi innbrot og skemmdarverk blikni samanburi vi a sem fjlmargt bendir til a s undirbningi og hafi jafnvel veri reynt hj leynijnustum strveldanna. Hugsanlega gtu hryjuverkasamtk einnig hafa s sr leik bori.

Vilji einhver kynna sr mli nnar eru feinar krkjur hr fyrir nean. San er auvelt a finna efni me hjlp Google.

Wikipedia um Stuxnet

Wikipedia um Cyberwarfare

Pentagon fears trojans, kill switches in foreign-made CPUs

Spy chiefs fear cyber attack

Towards Countering the Rise of the Silicon Trojan

Hardware Trojan: Threats and emerging solutions

Jerusalem Post: The Lessons of Stuxnet

Google: Stuxnet Cyberwarfare Electronic Warefare Silicon Trojan Ghostnet

Stuxnet Takes It Up A Level

October 3, 2010: Cyber War is not new. There have been skirmishes between nation states; Russia used cyber weapons against Estonia in 2007 and Georgia in 2008. However, the appearance of the Stuxnet Worm is an escalation on a level with the introduction of intercontinental ballistic missiles. It has been a wakeup call to the world...
Strategy Page
"Stuxnet - A working and fearsome prototype of a cyber-weapon that will lead to the creation of a new arms race in the world." - Kaspersky Labs
Hva hefi Hmer sagt vi svona ntma Trjuhestum?

Skrr tengdar essari bloggfrslu:

Merkilega mikil fylgni milli virkni slar og vatnsmagns strfljts S-Amerku...

trlega mikil fylgni virist vera milli virkni slar og vatnsmagns strfljtsins Paran Suur Amerku, eins og tvrtt virist vera myndinni hr fyrir nean.

Paran fljti er hi fjra strsta heimi mia vi vatnsmagn sem er 20.600 rmmetrar sekndu, og hi fimmta strsta mia vi svi aan sem a flytur vatn, en str vatnasvisins er 3.100.000 ferklmetrar, ea 30-fld str slands. Fljti safnar vatni Brasilu, Blivu, Praguay og Argentnu. sar ess eru skammt noran vi Buenos Aires. Vatni nni upptk sn rigningu essu grarstra landsvi, og er v vatnsmagni nni mjg gur mlikvari mealrkomuna.

tmaritinu Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics mun vntanlega innan skamms birtast grein eftir Pablo Mauas and Andrea P. Buccino. Greinin nefnist Long-term solar activity influences on Souh American rivers. Greinina m nlgast me v a smella hr. David Whitehouse skrifar um rannsknina hr. Greinin er framhald annarrar greinar um sama efni sem birtist ri 2008. Greinarnar arf a skoa samhengi.

stulaust er a endurtaka efni greinarinnar, en henni er einnig fjalla um Colorado na og tvr verr hennar, San Juan og Atuel. essum m er ekki eingngu regnvatn, heldur einnig afrennsli jkla Andesfjllum. Niurstaan er v ekki beint sambrileg vi Paran ar sem vatni nni er eingngu regnvatn. Engu a sur m sj ar fylgni milli rennsli nna og slvirkninnar.

essari frlegu grein er minnst arar rannsknir sambandi milli slvirkninnar og rkomu, og slvirkninnar og monsn vinda. Rannsknir sem gefa svipaa niurstu.

a er ekki anna a sj en sambandi milli virkni slar og rkomu Suur-Amerku s miki og tvrtt. vaknar auvita spurningin: Hvernig stendur essu?

1909 til 2003.

Svartur ferill: Frvik vatnsmagni Paran fljtsins.

Rauur ferill: Frvik virkni slar (slblettatalan).

(Smella tvisvar mynd til a stkka).

Alla greinina m nlgast hr sem prfrk (preprint).

Greinina fr 2008 m nlgast hr.

Pistill David Whitehouse um mli er hr.

River streamflows are excellent climatic indicators since they integrate precipitation
over large areas. Here we follow up on our previous study of the influence of
solar activity on the flow of the Paran River, in South America. We find that the
unusual minimum of solar activity in recent years have a correlation on very low
levels in the Paran’s flow, and we report historical evidence of low water levels
during the Little Ice Age. We also study data for the streamflow of three other
rivers (Colorado, San Juan and Atuel), and snow levels in the Andes. We obtained
that, after eliminating the secular trends and smoothing out the solar cycle, there
is a strong positive correlation between the residuals of both the Sunspot Number
and the streamflows, as we obtained for the Parana. Both results put together imply
that higher solar activity corresponds to larger precipitation, both in summer and
in wintertime, not only in the large basin of the Parana, but also in the Andean
region north of the limit with Patagonia.

Skrr tengdar essari bloggfrslu:

lafur Ragnar st sig vel hj BBC gr: Myndband...

Jeremy Paxman hj BBC er ekktur fyrir a vera harskeyttur. Hann komst varla a egar hann mtti lafi Ragnari gr. lafur lt Paxman ekki vaa yfir sig og st sig me pri.

Svona kynning hefi auvita tt a koma miklu miklu fyrr fr stjrnvldum. a verur a segjast eins og er a arna geri forsetinn gagn, hva sem manni finnst um atburina fyrr vikunni.

Sj einnig tt um Icesave, .e. fyrri hlutann, Newsnight BBC 5. janar.

Nsta sa


Ágúst H Bjarnason
Ágúst H Bjarnason

Verkfr. hjá Verkís.

Audiatur et altera pars

Aðeins málefnalegar athugasemdir, sem eiga ótvíætt við efni viðkomandi pistils, og skrifaðar án skætings og neikvæðni í garð annarra, og að jafnaði undir fullu nafni, verða birtar. 

Um bloggi




Click to get your own widget


free counters


Slin dag:

(Smella mynd)


Oluveri dag:



  • dag (20.4.): 14
  • Sl. slarhring: 17
  • Sl. viku: 79
  • Fr upphafi: 762117


  • Innlit dag: 4
  • Innlit sl. viku: 56
  • Gestir dag: 4
  • IP-tlur dag: 4

Uppfrt 3 mn. fresti.

Aprl 2024
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        


Ath. Vinsamlegast kveiki Javascript til a hefja innskrningu.

Hafu samband