Hello, I am Calvin M. Wolff, PhD, P.E.

I am what some call a “Global Warming Skeptic”, or more accurately a “Luke Warmer”. I believe that man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) affects climate, but not catastrophically. The intent of this opus is to support and explain my conviction, providing proof that in most cases can be tracked and verified by the reader (do-it-yourself)..

Please see “Why I’m Into Energy”

Climate, in the sense of annual average global surface temperature, is affected by the following:200_cmwidahobmp

  • Direct Light from the Sun (Insolation)
  • Ocean Currents & Oscillations, Including El Niňo and La Niňa
  • CO2
  • Clouds
  • Sunspots and Cosmic Rays (which effect cloud formation)
  • Volcanic Activity
  • Oceanic Absorption of CO2
  • Plant Life

This site is subdivided into specific topics related to climate.   Go now to  “Summary” on menu at the top of this page.

A PowerPoint based, 58 slide tutorial is provided in here to be used as a basis for a lecture on the subject.   See menu above.  It is available as a PowerPoint and PDF files.

You can contact me at

Thank you for visiting.

2 thoughts on “Introduction

  1. Maaya

    Your opener, that ‘there’s been no wanirmg now for nearly a decade’ is entirely disingenuous for reasons that I’ll more than happily expand on, but for the sake of brevity:- Arctic sea ice melt: All over the media recently – ice melt in the Arctic has reached record levels. Whilst some might get excited over cheaper freight via the soon-to-be accessible Northwest Passage, various communities and wildlife depending on the ice may beg to differ…- Observed temperature rise: Rag on the ‘broken hockey-stick’ as much as you please, the obvious trending in surface, satellite, and radiosonde measurement can’t be ignored save with a fairly large effort of will.- Permafrost thaw: Again, this is an observed phenomenon making the news regularly at the moment. All the more worrying for some of the nasties that the Russians have tucked away in frozen areas…- Glacial melt: Although there are a few alternative theories floating about as to how the increase in glacial melt has been occasioned, it’s a bit silly to ignore the most seemingly obvious one, especially when the weight of scientific opinion swings in behind climate change as the most likely cause.As to evidence that wanirmg would be ‘catastrophic’ – I’m not sure I want to have a stab at it. Your question is too vague – do you mean projected wanirmg under the IPCC ‘business-as-usual’ scenario and within the next fifty-odd years, or a worst-case scenario at 2100, or what? Your question is phrased problematically – “what are the four bones I will break if I jump off this ladder?” Which rung are you jumping off? I think you need to define exactly what your threshold for ‘dangerous’ wanirmg is. If you don’t wish to, I will have a crack at it myself.DenMT(BTW I look forward to a good discussion on science as opposed to politics in this thread, as it seems that’s what you’re about here. I found it telling in the ‘Oh Drought!’ thread that you totally avoided engaging any of the meat in the argument, choosing rather to simply have a crack at Al Gore and Tim Flannery. Ball not the man!)

    1. Post author

      I’m trying to follow your arguments.
      Ice melt: Arctic Ice is increasing.
      Glacial Melt & Permafrost Thaw: it’s happening, how much due to anthropogenic CO2 is in question.
      Surface Temps: Satellite data shows essentially flat temp. curve for over 16 years, radiosonde data agrees. See page on Climate Models vs. Actual.
      It seems to me that this may be a standardized response to skeptic blogs.
      Anyway, thanks for the comment.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *