Death knell for AGW
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
December 05, 2009
Britain's government meteorlogical office to review temp record
[FONT=times new roman,times]In a process estimated to take years, Britain's Met Office is opening up all its climate records and reevaluating them in light of the East Anglia CRU disclosures [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Ben Webster of the TimesOnline:[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Clarice Feldman[/FONT]
Britain's government meteorlogical office to review temp record
[FONT=times new roman,times]In a process estimated to take years, Britain's Met Office is opening up all its climate records and reevaluating them in light of the East Anglia CRU disclosures [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Ben Webster of the TimesOnline:[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]The Met Office plans to re-examine 160 years of temperature data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made global warming has been shattered by leaked e-mails.[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]The new analysis of the data will take three years, meaning that the Met Office will not be able to state with absolute confidence the extent of the warming trend until the end of 2012.[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]The Met Office database is one of three main sources of temperature data analysis on which the UN's main climate change science body relies for its assessment that global warming is a serious danger to the world. This assessment is the basis for next week's climate change talks in Copenhagen aimed at cutting CO2 emissions.[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]The Government is attempting to stop the Met Office from carrying out the re-examination, arguing that it would be seized upon by climate change sceptics. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]One can understand why the very thought of the re-examination is frightening to the Labour Government. For heaven's sake, why wait for facts that might well prove it wrong?[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]The new analysis of the data will take three years, meaning that the Met Office will not be able to state with absolute confidence the extent of the warming trend until the end of 2012.[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]The Met Office database is one of three main sources of temperature data analysis on which the UN's main climate change science body relies for its assessment that global warming is a serious danger to the world. This assessment is the basis for next week's climate change talks in Copenhagen aimed at cutting CO2 emissions.[/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]The Government is attempting to stop the Met Office from carrying out the re-examination, arguing that it would be seized upon by climate change sceptics. [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]Clarice Feldman[/FONT]
The thing is, is that CRU isn't the ONLY source for temperature data. There are others, and they all have similar data (and the only rational argument against climate change is in the interpretation of the data, not in who said what, who was cheating, etc.). There will be anomalies in data sets, but that's because there are variables that interact at different rates and we don't know all the variables and there are loads of them in climate study.
Anyway, the University of East Anglia had a very poor reputation well before this insignificant scandal:
http://www.topuniversities.com/university/640/university-of-east-anglia
http://www.topuniversities.com/university/640/university-of-east-anglia
Looks like the whole lot of them has been cooking the books and raking in the bucks as a result.
Time to put the brakes on the GW gravy train.
Time to put the brakes on the GW gravy train.
Global warming controversy reaches NASA climate data
By Stephen Dinan
The fight over climate science is about to cross the Atlantic with a U.S. researcher poised to sue NASA, demanding the release of the same kind of information that landed a leading British center in hot water over charges that it skewed its data.
Christopher C. Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said NASA has refused for two years to provide information under the Freedom of Information Act that would show how the agency has shaped its climate data and explain why the agency has repeatedly had to correct its data dating as far back as the 1930s.
"I assume that what is there is highly damaging," Mr. Horner said. "These guys are quite clearly bound and determined not to reveal their internal discussions about this."
Big government at its best; obfuscate, delay and deny.
By Stephen Dinan
The fight over climate science is about to cross the Atlantic with a U.S. researcher poised to sue NASA, demanding the release of the same kind of information that landed a leading British center in hot water over charges that it skewed its data.
Christopher C. Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said NASA has refused for two years to provide information under the Freedom of Information Act that would show how the agency has shaped its climate data and explain why the agency has repeatedly had to correct its data dating as far back as the 1930s.
"I assume that what is there is highly damaging," Mr. Horner said. "These guys are quite clearly bound and determined not to reveal their internal discussions about this."
Big government at its best; obfuscate, delay and deny.
A senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute who doesn't understand the importance of keeping information private to remain competitive!
He's an @ss. Those assumptions are without supporting evidence, so it's nothing more than paranoia. Why do you think McIntyre moved onto CRU? There wasn't anything of great value to pick through. NASA does a very good job.
The Public Policy
Sky May Not Be Falling
By Peter Hannaford on 12.7.09 @ 6:07AM
I knew Henny-Penny, founder and Recording Secretary of The Holy Order of The Sky Is Falling, had been having a couple of bad weeks, what with the announcement that the big UN global warming conference in Copenhagen was not expected to produce a treaty. Little did she or I know, however, that recent days would bring catastrophe to the entire movement that believes in manmade global warming.
She called in great distress when she learned that Phil Jones, who heads the Climate Research United at East Anglia University in England, had stepped down while his role in Climategate was being investigated. Our conversation went this way:
Ms. H-P: To make matters worse, Michael Mann, who was involved in a lot of those e-mails planning to manipulate data, is under investigation by Penn State University where he works. This is awful.
Us: Granted, it is serious. Jones, Mann and others worked, via e-mails, to deny dissenting scientists peer review forums. They manipulated temperature data and stonewalled Freedom of Information Act requests -- among things.
Ms. H-P: I believed them when they said man-made global warming was a matter of settled science.
Us: It never was. The "proof" is in the form of computer projections based on data considered to be insufficiently comprehensive by many scientists. Furthermore, Jones and his CRU colleagues claim the base data that started this process was lost or disposed of several years ago. Very convenient.
Ms. H-P: But why would they falsify data?
Us: No one knows for sure. The lure of big money might be one reason. Jones, for example, received approximately $19 million worth of research grants between 2000 and 2006. That's six times greater than he received for the entire decade of the '90s.
Bear in mind that UN bureaucrats, egged on by the some of the members -- not to mention the most ardent environmentalists -- kept sounding the alarm that icebergs were melting, sea levels would rise and we would all fry within a few years. Their motivation? An international treaty that would bind the industrialized nations to sharply reduce industrial production while forking over billions of dollars to non-industrialized ones. All these grand conferences are intended to produce that result. It's social engineering on a worldwide scale. The state of the climate is only a vehicle to achieve it.
Ms. H-P. I hadn't thought of it that way. When I first observed that the sky was falling, I contacted a scientist friend who said I might be on to something. He'd noticed that the average temperature that year was up a little and he thought there might be a correlation. He spread to some of his colleagues and it caught on. Why one of them, James Hansen of NASA, became a regular Paul Revere sounding the alarm. During the George W. Bush Administration he claimed he was being muzzled, but he managed to give 1,400 interviews and turn out many alarming NASA press releases. Now it looks as if the temperature data he was using was wrong.
Us: Don't forget John Holdren, President Obama's science advisor. He's been an alarmist for over 30 years. In 1971 he predicted a new ice age. He said it would be caused by burning jet fuel, agricultural dust and smog -- all things generated by human activity. The ice age didn't happen, so now he's selling global warming.
Holdren was also involved in a Climategate e-mail exchange. And, he sought to undermine the professional credibility of two physicists for papers they published in which they concluded there was not persuasive evidence to support the widely held view that anthropogenic (that is, man-made) globe warming is a fact.
Ms. H-P: I am devastated. Before I called you I canceled my tickets for Copenhagen. I'm just too depressed to attend. On top of that I haven't been able to get through to our Pontiff, Al Gore. I was sure he would give me reassurance, but both his voice mailbox and his e-mailbox are full. He hasn't said a word publicly since the Climategate scandal broke.
Us: Maybe that's because he's an investor in a firm that will sell "carbon credits" to companies that are over their quota. That would be a very profitable business if the Obama Cap-and-Trade bill were to pass the Senate. So, your Pontiff may be spending all his time in Washington lobbying. .
Ms. H-P: Oh.
Sky May Not Be Falling
By Peter Hannaford on 12.7.09 @ 6:07AM
I knew Henny-Penny, founder and Recording Secretary of The Holy Order of The Sky Is Falling, had been having a couple of bad weeks, what with the announcement that the big UN global warming conference in Copenhagen was not expected to produce a treaty. Little did she or I know, however, that recent days would bring catastrophe to the entire movement that believes in manmade global warming.
She called in great distress when she learned that Phil Jones, who heads the Climate Research United at East Anglia University in England, had stepped down while his role in Climategate was being investigated. Our conversation went this way:
Ms. H-P: To make matters worse, Michael Mann, who was involved in a lot of those e-mails planning to manipulate data, is under investigation by Penn State University where he works. This is awful.
Us: Granted, it is serious. Jones, Mann and others worked, via e-mails, to deny dissenting scientists peer review forums. They manipulated temperature data and stonewalled Freedom of Information Act requests -- among things.
Ms. H-P: I believed them when they said man-made global warming was a matter of settled science.
Us: It never was. The "proof" is in the form of computer projections based on data considered to be insufficiently comprehensive by many scientists. Furthermore, Jones and his CRU colleagues claim the base data that started this process was lost or disposed of several years ago. Very convenient.
Ms. H-P: But why would they falsify data?
Us: No one knows for sure. The lure of big money might be one reason. Jones, for example, received approximately $19 million worth of research grants between 2000 and 2006. That's six times greater than he received for the entire decade of the '90s.
Bear in mind that UN bureaucrats, egged on by the some of the members -- not to mention the most ardent environmentalists -- kept sounding the alarm that icebergs were melting, sea levels would rise and we would all fry within a few years. Their motivation? An international treaty that would bind the industrialized nations to sharply reduce industrial production while forking over billions of dollars to non-industrialized ones. All these grand conferences are intended to produce that result. It's social engineering on a worldwide scale. The state of the climate is only a vehicle to achieve it.
Ms. H-P. I hadn't thought of it that way. When I first observed that the sky was falling, I contacted a scientist friend who said I might be on to something. He'd noticed that the average temperature that year was up a little and he thought there might be a correlation. He spread to some of his colleagues and it caught on. Why one of them, James Hansen of NASA, became a regular Paul Revere sounding the alarm. During the George W. Bush Administration he claimed he was being muzzled, but he managed to give 1,400 interviews and turn out many alarming NASA press releases. Now it looks as if the temperature data he was using was wrong.
Us: Don't forget John Holdren, President Obama's science advisor. He's been an alarmist for over 30 years. In 1971 he predicted a new ice age. He said it would be caused by burning jet fuel, agricultural dust and smog -- all things generated by human activity. The ice age didn't happen, so now he's selling global warming.
Holdren was also involved in a Climategate e-mail exchange. And, he sought to undermine the professional credibility of two physicists for papers they published in which they concluded there was not persuasive evidence to support the widely held view that anthropogenic (that is, man-made) globe warming is a fact.
Ms. H-P: I am devastated. Before I called you I canceled my tickets for Copenhagen. I'm just too depressed to attend. On top of that I haven't been able to get through to our Pontiff, Al Gore. I was sure he would give me reassurance, but both his voice mailbox and his e-mailbox are full. He hasn't said a word publicly since the Climategate scandal broke.
Us: Maybe that's because he's an investor in a firm that will sell "carbon credits" to companies that are over their quota. That would be a very profitable business if the Obama Cap-and-Trade bill were to pass the Senate. So, your Pontiff may be spending all his time in Washington lobbying. .
Ms. H-P: Oh.
Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after 'Danish text' leak
John Vidal in Copenhagen
The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.
The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.
The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as "the circle of commitment" – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.
The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol's principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.
The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as "a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks".
Leakier than a faucet with a worn-out O-ring.
John Vidal in Copenhagen
The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.
The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.
The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as "the circle of commitment" – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.
The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol's principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.
The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as "a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks".
Leakier than a faucet with a worn-out O-ring.
John Coleman on the “six legged monster”
10 12 2009
Guest post by John Coleman – KUSI-TV, Weather Channel Founder
December 7, 2009
David and Goliath
The 21st century Goliath is Global Warming. It is a powerful six-legged monster. In no order of strength, those legs are:
(1) The big money climate change scientists and their powerful institutions from governmental centers to Universities,
(2) The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which is a Geneva-based, highly funded bureaucracy controlled by one-world government political activists,
(3) Environmentalists who seek to use threats of climate chaos to stop the use of fossil fuels and return to a simpler, more “natural”, primitive lifestyle,
(4) Government at all levels whose political leaders find dealing with global warming is their opportunity to save us all from disaster cementing their status and success,
(5) The media populated by people who love to warn us of impending disaster and give us the advice we need to cope, who believe in Al Gore and his political party and who know that “the sky is falling” is the best headline of them all,
(6) Al Gore, who uses his status as a successful former Senator and Vice President to provide a platform to promote his message of doom and gloom, a message he learned in his only college science class and must have truly believed for many years but should see now is only an empty threat.
The total financial resources and power structure behind Goliath are staggering.
Goliath now occupies Copenhagen. For the 15th time, Goliath is meeting to publicize his long list of threatened consequences if do not head his demands. The ice will melt, the coasts and islands will flood displacing millions and killing tens of thousands; the polar bears and eventually thousands of other species will die as habitats are destroyed; hurricanes will become superstorms wrecking havoc on the coastal cities killing tens of thousands; heat waves will kill more hundreds of thousands as they grip the planet; drought and heat will destroy our agriculture starving untold millions more. He tells us this is because of our carbon footprints left by our burning of fossil fuels emitting exhaust of carbon dioxide.
Fifteen thousand “delegates” are attending Goliath’s conference coming by hundreds of private jet aircraft, riding in over a thousand limos, occupying every hotel room for miles around and all living on expense accounts paid by taxpayers and stock holders. They are making speeches, politicking one another and most importantly negotiating how much the people of each of their nations will reduce their carbon footprints in coming years, having a major impact on all our lifestyles.
Meanwhile, here at home The Environmental Protection Administration, part of Goliath’s government leg, just classified carbon dioxide as a pollutant that is an endangerment to our lives. And the US Congress is working with the President on legislation known as Cap and trade that will make all of us pay taxes for our carbon footprints.
Goliath is a rich and very powerful monster. He thrives on carbon dioxide.
David is tiny and weak. He is composed of:
30 thousand scientists who sign a petition but only a few hundred of whom have the specialized education, skill and positions to do unfunded or underfunded research that debunks the carbon dioxide greenhouse claims of Goliath,
A handful of struggling policy institutes that strive to stage events to educate the public and media about the global warming myth,
The internet, a resource that is open to all on both sides to communicate and educate and organize and protest as best the skeptics can, There skeptics have established websites and blogs and posted videos, some serious and some as clever as animated musical parodies,
Talk radio with a hundred solid talk hosts who cover all aspects of the folly of global warming and reach several million people,
And a small cadre of elected officials from one or two Senators to a hand-full of members of the House of Representatives, to the President of Czech Republic and a small collection of other office holders who understand the science and are brave enough to join a minority group.
We are outmanned, poor by comparison and somewhat leaderless and disorganized.
How can David win this battle? The rocks he throws are small and his rock pile is small. Time is short before the consequences of increased government control, a scaled back and altered lifestyle and, most of all, establishment of bad science as a controlling instrument.
David has one great strength, however: Truth.
There is no significant man-made global warming, there has not been any in the past and there is no reason to fear any in the future. Carbon dioxide is a natural trace gas in the atmosphere with very limited greenhouse impact on temperatures and naturally produced CO2 greatly exceeds the CO2 produced by burning fossil fuels. There is no tipping point when the impact of CO2 sets in to cause an increased impact because of “forcing.” The bad science behind the global warming myth is based on a hypothesis that has failed.
Superman fought for “truth, justice and the American way.”
So is David. But he is no Superman. The battle goes on.
10 12 2009
Guest post by John Coleman – KUSI-TV, Weather Channel Founder
December 7, 2009
David and Goliath
The 21st century Goliath is Global Warming. It is a powerful six-legged monster. In no order of strength, those legs are:
(1) The big money climate change scientists and their powerful institutions from governmental centers to Universities,
(2) The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which is a Geneva-based, highly funded bureaucracy controlled by one-world government political activists,
(3) Environmentalists who seek to use threats of climate chaos to stop the use of fossil fuels and return to a simpler, more “natural”, primitive lifestyle,
(4) Government at all levels whose political leaders find dealing with global warming is their opportunity to save us all from disaster cementing their status and success,
(5) The media populated by people who love to warn us of impending disaster and give us the advice we need to cope, who believe in Al Gore and his political party and who know that “the sky is falling” is the best headline of them all,
(6) Al Gore, who uses his status as a successful former Senator and Vice President to provide a platform to promote his message of doom and gloom, a message he learned in his only college science class and must have truly believed for many years but should see now is only an empty threat.
The total financial resources and power structure behind Goliath are staggering.
Goliath now occupies Copenhagen. For the 15th time, Goliath is meeting to publicize his long list of threatened consequences if do not head his demands. The ice will melt, the coasts and islands will flood displacing millions and killing tens of thousands; the polar bears and eventually thousands of other species will die as habitats are destroyed; hurricanes will become superstorms wrecking havoc on the coastal cities killing tens of thousands; heat waves will kill more hundreds of thousands as they grip the planet; drought and heat will destroy our agriculture starving untold millions more. He tells us this is because of our carbon footprints left by our burning of fossil fuels emitting exhaust of carbon dioxide.
Fifteen thousand “delegates” are attending Goliath’s conference coming by hundreds of private jet aircraft, riding in over a thousand limos, occupying every hotel room for miles around and all living on expense accounts paid by taxpayers and stock holders. They are making speeches, politicking one another and most importantly negotiating how much the people of each of their nations will reduce their carbon footprints in coming years, having a major impact on all our lifestyles.
Meanwhile, here at home The Environmental Protection Administration, part of Goliath’s government leg, just classified carbon dioxide as a pollutant that is an endangerment to our lives. And the US Congress is working with the President on legislation known as Cap and trade that will make all of us pay taxes for our carbon footprints.
Goliath is a rich and very powerful monster. He thrives on carbon dioxide.
David is tiny and weak. He is composed of:
30 thousand scientists who sign a petition but only a few hundred of whom have the specialized education, skill and positions to do unfunded or underfunded research that debunks the carbon dioxide greenhouse claims of Goliath,
A handful of struggling policy institutes that strive to stage events to educate the public and media about the global warming myth,
The internet, a resource that is open to all on both sides to communicate and educate and organize and protest as best the skeptics can, There skeptics have established websites and blogs and posted videos, some serious and some as clever as animated musical parodies,
Talk radio with a hundred solid talk hosts who cover all aspects of the folly of global warming and reach several million people,
And a small cadre of elected officials from one or two Senators to a hand-full of members of the House of Representatives, to the President of Czech Republic and a small collection of other office holders who understand the science and are brave enough to join a minority group.
We are outmanned, poor by comparison and somewhat leaderless and disorganized.
How can David win this battle? The rocks he throws are small and his rock pile is small. Time is short before the consequences of increased government control, a scaled back and altered lifestyle and, most of all, establishment of bad science as a controlling instrument.
David has one great strength, however: Truth.
There is no significant man-made global warming, there has not been any in the past and there is no reason to fear any in the future. Carbon dioxide is a natural trace gas in the atmosphere with very limited greenhouse impact on temperatures and naturally produced CO2 greatly exceeds the CO2 produced by burning fossil fuels. There is no tipping point when the impact of CO2 sets in to cause an increased impact because of “forcing.” The bad science behind the global warming myth is based on a hypothesis that has failed.
Superman fought for “truth, justice and the American way.”
So is David. But he is no Superman. The battle goes on.
I won't be rude enough to post the entire article, but here's a little bit along with the link to the whole thing:
Debunking George Will, Part 238 « Climate Progress
Debunking George Will, Part 238 « Climate Progress
The latest issue of The Economist (and you don't find many main stream publications as right wing as it is) has some articles discussing why it is important to deal with climate change.
I am just curious about the payout that underdeveloped nations are going to get. I am hoping for a non-binding resolution so it is as toothless as Kyoto.
Do you think the folks at Copenhagen have the guts to lift China and India from the underdeveloped nation status?
Do you think the folks at Copenhagen have the guts to lift China and India from the underdeveloped nation status?