The Reference Frame: Video: John Christy at Russia Today

Yesterday, Russia Today has made two interesting and, I would say, very balanced, professional, and informative interviews - with John Christy and Patrick Michaels.

Does the Huge China-Australia Coal Deal Square With the Copenhagen Accord? - NYTimes.com

Environmental activists are attacking a $60 billion deal that will keep Chinese power stations supplied with Australian coal for at least the next two decades.
...
Australia provides about 30 percent of the world's coal, exporting 233 tonnes [?] annually, according to the Australia Coal Association. It's the nation's largest commodity export, and the Sino-Australian deal is expected to create tens of thousands of jobs in Queensland and generate multimillion-dollar royalty payments for the state, according to Australian press reports.

Unintentional IPCC Laugh Of The Week « SOYLENT GREEN

Maurice Strong and George Soros must be pulling their hair out after hearing this announcement:

The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has asked governments around the world to nominate scientists to the panel that will review and finalise its fifth climate assessment report. (Emphasis mine)

Bwuhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

Global warming: U.N. climate panel under fire - chicagotribune.com

So now the U.N. panel's credibility is heavily damaged — and so is the science of global warming. Doubts about the science — and scientists — are creeping in. Many people can't help but wonder: Are some of these climate scientists trying to find the facts or hide them?

You could see that uncertainty in the recent global warming summit in Copenhagen, where the world's powers agreed to absolutely nothing of consequence.

You can see it in the U.S. Senate, where an expensive and complicated cap-and-trade carbon bill is dead.

[Hide the incline] » Another IPCC Error: Antarctic Sea Ice Increase Underestimated by 50%

So, the peer reviewed literature, both extant at the time of the AR4 as well as published since the release of the AR4, shows that there has been a significant increase in the extent of sea ice around Antarctica since the time of the first satellite observations observed in the late 1970s. And yet the AR4 somehow “assessed” the evidence and determined not only that the increase was only half the rate established in the peer-reviewed literature, but also that it was statistically insignificant as well. And thus, the increase in sea ice in the Antarctic was downplayed in preference to highlighting the observed decline in sea ice in the Arctic.

It is little wonder why, considering that the AR4 found that “Sea ice is projected to shrink in both the Arctic and Antarctic under all SRES scenarios.”