Gross Errors in the IPCC-AR4 Report Regarding Past & Future Changes in Global Tropical Cyclone Activity - A Noble Disgrace | Originals

[William M. Gray] This paper brings forth observational and theoretical evidence to show that rising levels of CO2 have not had any observable association with increases in global tropical cyclone frequency and intensity. In fact, levels have been trending downward over the last 20 years. This paper discusses why we should not be able to measure any potential future CO2-TC association for many decades, and if any such potential future relationship should ever be able to be isolated, it would be quite small. It also dissects the many observational and theoretical errors of the IPCC-AR4 concerning its reported past and likely future increases of global TC activity.

This paper extends the list of IPCC-AR4’s many questionable conclusions and misrepresentation beyond those that have already been earlier pointed out such as the Himalayas becoming snow-free by 2035, the Arctic Ocean possibly becoming ice-free in coming decades, and the possible coming Amazon rainforest destruction. The issuance of these erroneous IPCC reports does much damage. They should be terminated.

Revkin’s ‘Knowosphere’: through communication, collaboration | SmartPlanet

On the compartmentalization of knowledge, a.k.a. reading online what supports your assumptions. “We’re still all dining on comfort food,” [Revkin] said. “But we’re at the world’s biggest buffet.”

Climate scientist - yes, we avoid debate | Australian Climate Madness

Sorry, but I think the reason is much simpler. Scientists avoid debate because they hate having to answer questions about the politicisation of the scientific process, the corruption of scientific integrity at the IPCC, Climategate and the Big Green bandwagon of funding that keeps most climate scientists in work.

Given Sherwood has used a trial analogy, here’s a slightly different one to think about