So where is all the carbonic acid coming from? How would you explain the shifting carbonate equilibrium in ocean waters?
Walter doesn't live in water, so he doesn't care I guess.
So where is all the carbonic acid coming from? How would you explain the shifting carbonate equilibrium in ocean waters?
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]
lmao if people put you in their ignore list, they can't see your posts.good luck!
lmao if people put you in their ignore list, they can't see your posts.
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.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]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]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]
In your opinion.They can't resist rather!
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.
"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."
Pretty much.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.
NASA does a very good job.
Opinion columnist George Will starts off his latest rant against climate change mitigation with this lede:
With 20,000 delegates, advocates and journalists jetting to Copenhagen for planet Earth’s last chance, the carbon footprint of the global warming summit will be the only impressive consequence of the climate-change meeting. Its organizers had hoped that it would produce binding caps on emissions, global taxation to redistribute trillions of dollars, and micromanagement of everyone’s choices.Impressive. One tries one’s damnedest to orchestrate as many ideological Pavlovian bells as possible into a Washington Post op-ed lede, but this one may be studied by climate disinformers for years to come.
One of the basic claims from the anti-mitigation/adaptation forces says that anthropogenic climate change is a myth propagated by scientists and shady global government types, and the UNFCCC itself, or those who seek “…global taxation to redistribute trillions of dollars, and micromanagement of everyone’s choices.”
In this formulation, the latter — the coming global micromanagers — apparently want to govern the world through “global taxation” and the creation of what would have to be a sophisticated system for controlling “everyone’s choices.” This would be stunningly impressive in itself. Such a system would involve a vast team of tax accountants and collectors, in addition to micro-managers. A global intelligence and police force would be necessary to monitor and enforce the global taxation and micromanagement process. Any citizen who discovered this conspiracy would be shouted down as a harebrained kook with a tenuous grip on reality. If this has happened to you already, then you just might have stumbled upon the expanding cabal!