Behind Closed Doors: “Perpetuating Rubbish” « Climate Audit
As noted above, despite the private misgivings of the various authors expressed prior to publication of Mann et al 2003, Osborn and Briffa 2006 used the Yang composite anyway (justifying its inclusion on the basis that it had been used in Mann et al, 2003.) Similar rationales were used for its inclusion in the IPCC 2007 Box 6.4 Figure 1 without overturning Bradley’s objection that such re-use simply “perpetuates rubbish.”
Media hypocrisy: Wikileaks good, Climategate bad | Australian Climate Madness
When Climategate 2.0 broke this week, The Age was more interested in the opinion of Phil Jones, one of the alleged “victims” of the leak, rather than staunchly supporting the release of the emails themselves:
At the Bureau of Meteorology, prominent alarmist David Jones boasts of snowing sceptics, and cites as evidence of global warming a drought now passed and a prediction since debunked
This is pretty ugly. In 2007 the NRC was setup to review the state of climate science. The usual players were involved. Today we have two separate examples of inappropriate behavior designed to squash any scientific dissent.
Fast, furious - and green | businessday.com.au
James Cameron believes we have no chance of tackling climate change unless people see that their lives could get better by solving the problem, so “change happens at a very large scale because the alternatives look more attractive”.
We are on the edge of an innovation revolution around resource efficiency, he says. “Technology is disruptive. We tend to think there is risk associated with change and stability in the status quo. There is not. The fossil fuel economy is not stable. There is risk associated with it, and the costs are escalating”.
As a bit of a petrol-head and Top Gear fan (despite its stuff-you-greenies posture), Cameron points to car design. “As it happens I’m one of those environmentalists who likes to wear smart suits, and I like nice things, and I like my car.”
No comments:
Post a Comment