ICECAP: How Bad is the Global Data

In this recent post, we discussed the problems with recent data that showed the argument presented by the EDF’s millionaire lawyer playing clueless environmentalist on Lou Dobbs Tonight that this will be the warmest decade is nonsense.
...
How can we trust NOAA/NASA/Hadley assessment of global changes given these and the other data integrity issues? Given that Hadley has destroyed old original data because they were running out of room in their data cabinet, can we ever hope to reconstruct the real truth?

As one of our scientist readers noted: “Well, the 999.9s you showed me today sure opened my eyes...the ramifications are stunning. I knew about the drop-off of stations before but never that existing station reports are so full of gaps or that they’re getting temperature readings from “ghost” stations. This is, as you have said, GARBAGE.

Linking health, wealth, and well being with the use of energy « Watts Up With That?

As noted at Reason on-line:

Who knows, even if one assumes that the purported damages from climate change indeed come to pass —there are good reasons to believe that the IPCC has overestimated the impacts of climate change (see here and here) — that a full accounting of the benefits and costs from industrialization may not reveal that developing countries owe developed countries for a net improvement in their well-being!

Advertising world joins to create 'Hopenhagen' - Campaign Brief

Media support includes:
• TV - CNN International, EuroNews, ESPN, NDTV
• Print - The Economist, Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, International Herald Tribune, Google, Harvard Business Review, Scientific American, National Geographic, Newsweek, Business India, Reader's Digest Canada, Maclean's.
• OOH - JC Decaux at JFK, LAX and other locations. Thomson Reuters Building (Times Square)

Dominic Lawson: Here's another phoney war: the one on climate change - The Independent

Myhrvold goes on to tell the freakonomists that while the IPCC is fretting fearfully about the CO2 in the atmosphere increasing from about 280 parts per million to 380, our mammalian ancestors successfully evolved at a time when the atmospheric concentration of CO2 was over 1,000 parts per million. Myhrvold then commits true apostasy by pointing out that "nor does atmospheric carbon dioxide necessarily warm the earth: ice-cap evidence shows that over the past several hundred thousand years, carbon dioxide levels have risen after a rise in temperature, rather than before it."