[John Shepherd] ...I would also wish to insist on a proper collective decision on any appointment: I don't know who you have in mind, but justice should both be done and be seen to be done. Like Brian I would be less nervous if it were someone from the "fraternity", too, but it would all depend on who it was...
At 18:06 26/09/2006, Saffron O'Neill wrote:
Thanks for all your individual comments so far on operationalising the
icons. To update:Irene has suggested that a produce a quick intro to how I plan to operationalise the polar bear icon. At the moment, the plan is to use an expert elicitation.
From: "Xiangdong Zhang" To: "Saffron O'Neill" Cc: "Xiangdong Zhang" Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:19 AM Subject: Re: Arctic model simulations for A1B to 2050?
Dear Saffron,
Thanks for your email and glad to learn your interesting work. It is important to build an effective bridge between climate change study and general public/policy-maker.
...On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 05:18:24PM +0100, Saffron O'Neill wrote: Dear Xiangdong Zhang
I am a PhD researcher supervised by Prof. Mike Hulme and Dr. Tim Osborn at the Tyndall Centre, UEA.
My research is centred around finding more salient methods of communicating climate change to the lay-public. My PhD is interdisciplinary, and aims to harness the emotive and visual power of 'icons' with a rigorous scientific analysis of possible changes under SRES A1B to 2050.
...I am interested in the results of your paper 'Towards a seasonally ice-covered Arctic Ocean'. I see here you have used a large number of model simulations to 2100. I was wondering if you had analysed or plotted the results of the models with scenario A1B to 2050? - as one of the icons chosen was the polar bear, and consequently I am searching for sea-ice area models.
I would greatly appreciate any assistance with this.
Regards,
Saffron O'Neill
Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research Zuckerman Institute for Connective Environmental Research School of Environmental Sciences University of East Anglia
>> Unfortunately, I have to disappoint you as far as publications are
>> concerned. I'm currently finishing up the first paper of my thesis, which
>> deals with the mating system of polar bears. Polar bears are not only
>> threatened by climate change, but more acutely by possible sex-selective
>> over-harvest, which might reduce the number of males to a point where
>> there will be too few males to impregnate all females.
[Saffron O'Neill, 2008] I have just received the review from the polar bear paper. Unfortunately,
it's been rejected...[Report from referee] The pretext of this project seems to be that O’Neill et al are interested in resolving the apparent discrepancy between what may be viewed as an alarmist general media impression of impending disaster for polar bears, a current (as opposed to a projected) worldwide population which may be in pretty good shape, and views of at least one global warming naysayer.
There is no research at CRU at UEA which shows that temperatures
have cooled since 1998. The temperature plot on our web page may
appear to show this, but no-one in their right mind would base anything
on a 5-7 year trend. It's surprising he should say this as a geologist, who
normally think of this sort of period as a few seconds in geologic time.
He is so out of step on virtually everything he has said - not just related to
us here.
- the world will not get colder. There won't be any sort of ice age for the next 50K
years.
Western nations 'used bullying tactics' at climate talks | Environment | The Observer
According to a Bolivian diplomat, their delegation agreed to participate in a side-meeting on condition that no plenary meeting took place at the same time.
The diplomat said: "Three minutes after they left the hall, an official plenary [to adopt the outcomes of the Kyoto protocol] started. It was a deliberate trick! We could only lodge reservations, and run to try and find our senior negotiators and get them back in to the room."
DailyTech - Climatologists Trade Tips on Destroying Evidence, Evangelizing Warming
The reports also ignore the fact that while it's easy to accuse the media, the oil industry, et al. for a mass conspiracy to silence anthropogenic global warming advocates, there's just as compelling a cause for AGW proponents to conspire to silence their critics in a dogmatic, non-scientific fashion.
Climategate-gate: The Dangerous Psychology of Ongoing Climate Change Denial - Forbes
Let’s do a quick thought experiment: Imagine you haven’t been feeling at the top of your game. Nothing consistently terrible, just a low-grade fever you notice now and then and few bad days here and there. You figure it’s just normal aging. But you go to your doctor anyway who runs some tests. You’re told it’s cancer. A really, really bad type of cancer that’s been growing for a long time and is only now starting to make you feel sick. Since you feel basically OK, you don’t believe the diagnosis. You want to ignore the whole situation, even when you’re told that if you wait until you feel sick it will be too late. You have to get treatment now or face catastrophic health changes. Your doctor also tells you that 97 to 98 percent of oncologists all agree that you’ve got cancer and you need immediate treatment. Being careful, you get a second opinion, and a third. And then a fourth from the hospital with the best reputation in your area. They all agree. Finally, you find someone who tells you what you want to hear: don’t worry, it’s just normal aging; ignore all those other doctors, they’re just trying to sell you the treatments they provide.
Forbes » Contributor Profile » Todd Essig
I'm a clinical psychologist and psychoanalyst. For 20+ years I've been practicing on 12th Street, around the corner from the Forbes Building and right in the middle of the digital revolution — both of them.
Is the global warming scare the greatest delusion in history? - Telegraph
All this madness ultimately rests on a blind faith in the threat of man-made global warming, which no one has done more to promote than the scientists whose private emails were again last week leaked onto the internet.
It is still not generally appreciated that the significance of these Climategate emails is that their authors, such as Michael Mann, are no ordinary scientists: they are a little group of fanatical insiders who have, for years, done more than anyone else to drive the warming scare, through their influence at the heart of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. And what is most striking about the picture that emerges from these emails is just how questionable the work of these men appears.
We see how they torture the evidence to support their theory – even to the point where some of them seem to lose faith in the story they are trying to tell. And we also see how rattled they were as soon as their work was challenged by expert outsiders such as Steve McIntyre, the mathematician who exposed the methods used to create Mann’s “hockey stick” temperature graph, which the IPCC had made Exhibit A for their theory.
Again and again we see them trying to defend the indefensible, giving vent to wild personal abuse of the enemies of what they call their “cause”, and stopping at nothing to keep their critics’ evidence out of IPCC reports and scientific journals, and prevent dissenting views from getting media atention.
This is no longer science worthy of the name. As I wrote when the first Climategate emails appeared in 2009, the global warming scare is far and away the greatest scientific scandal of our generation. When we then contemplate the insanity of the measures the politicians have imposed on us in consequence, we know we are looking at a collective flight from reality which has no precedent in the history of the world.
Why all the cloak and dagger stuff if this is all settled science…? | Watts Up With That?
1921 Drought Revealed 7,000 Year Old Houses In Switzerland | Real Science
Email 340
date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:13:20 -0500
from: "Tom Jacob" <Tom.Jacob@USA.dupont.com>
subject: REFLECTIONS ON THE HAGUE...
to: ... schellnhuber@pik-potsdam.de... jonathan.pershing@iea.org, RKinley@unfccc.int, ...m.hulme@uea.ac.uk...pachuri@teri.res.in...
munasinghe@worldbank.org...In The Hague, we saw for the first time organized disruption of the conduct of negotiation and publicly staged confrontations. While
organized and deeply committed environmental activism has long been an important part of the UNFCCC process through major groups such
as NRDC, EDF/ED, WWF and Greenpeace, they have operated within the structure as constructive participants in the policy-setting process,
along with industry. At The Hague, this "inside" role was supplemented by hundreds of young, relatively naïve demonstrators brought in
specifically to energize the environmental presence and confront the process. Even some within the ranks of the more established
participants -- while disavowing the takeover of the negotiating room -- saw fit to publicly offer Minister Pronk and the
UNFCCC Secretariate a veiled threat of "Seattle" if the process failed to deliver.In the context of this resurgence of "environmental fundamentalism" it is also interesting to contrast the dynamics of the final
give-and-take between the US and the EU in The Hague.
I've spoken to Renate Christ who is head of the IPCC Secretariat in Geneva. I've given her a note about what we want, but we won't get a response by our August deadline. What will happen though is that the whole issue of National FOIs/EIRs will be discussed at the next full IPCC plenary meeting in Bali in October. This is not a meeting that many scientists will go to. IPCC have got lawyers involved from their sponsoring UN organizations (UNEP and WMO). They have been alerted up to the issue by us and by others (mainly from US organizations like NOAA, DoE). They will come to a ruling then.
2007 email from Mann to Phil Jones, cc Gavin
thanks for forwarding. It may be difficult for me to sue them over a footnote, and in fact he is very careful only to intimate accusations against me in a response to your comments. Note that he does not do so in the paper. I'm sure they know that I would sue them for that, and that I have a top lawyer already representing me.
Wei Chyung needs to sue them, or at the least threaten a lawsuit. If he doesn't, this will set a dangerous new precedent. I could put him in touch w/ anleading attorney who would do this pro bono. Of course, this has to be done quickly. The threat of a lawsuit alone my prevent them from publishing this paper, so time is of the essence. Please feel free to mention this directly to Wei Chyung, in particular that I think he needs to pursue a legal course her independent of whatever his university is doing. He cannot wait for Stony Brook to complete its internal investigations! If he does so, it will be too late to stop this.
Gavin is in Shanghai, but perhaps may be able to provide some brief thoughts himself on this,
Please find attached (confidentially) a draft of a point-by-point response to the House Committee inquiry.
I am currently talking w/ lawyers--the best option would be to have their request (or, more to the point, any possible subpoena that might
follow it up) dismissed in court as frivolous in nature.
ClimateGate FOIA grepper - email 1849
They've [McKitrick et al] been making threats against NSF about supposed data policies and even against Ray, Tom Crowley, and others too, claiming that they have a right to all of our data and computer programs (the hubris!). Confidentially, NSF lawyers have found their threats baseless as well as obnoxious, and will be telling them formally that NSF policy in no way legally requires funded scientists to provided their data (let alone computer codes!) for public access, but scientists are *encouraged* to provide their data. NSF will be telling them to stop pestering them. I'm forwarding a formal email (based on numerous informal discussion w/ Dave Verardo) to NSF, which is confidential (!), that provides some more information.... As we all know, we had made all of our data available previously, so the accusations by these bozos are baselss, though we agree that we would have given more care to the completeness of documentation had we known a stunt like this was to be pulled by the contrarians..
Wei-Chyung, Tom,
I won't be replying to either of the emails below, nor to any of the accusations on the Climate Audit website.I've sent them on to someone here at UEA to see if we should be discussing anything with our legal staff.
The second letter seems an attempt to be nice to me, and somehow split up the original author team.
I do now wish I'd never sent them the data after their FOIA request!
Cheers
Phil
Susan Solomon was here on Tuesday getting an honorary degree. She says we will
have to deal with all these crackpots in the IPCC ! There will be a number in the atmos
obs, paleo and in your chapter I suspect - will likely be the hardest bits to write.
Still awaiting from you a revised draft to comment for IDAG.
As for your email, there was some press activity related to this skeptic [Timo Hämeranta?] below, but
managed to talk the BBC out of doing anything.
[Phil Jones] When the FOI requests began here, the FOI person said we had to abide by the requests. It took a couple of half hour sessions - one at a screen, to convince them otherwise showing them what CA was all about. Once they became aware of the types of people we were dealing with, everyone at UEA (in the registry and in the Environmental Sciences school - the head of school and a few others) became very supportive.
...At 01:17 03/12/2008, Ben Santer wrote:
...One of the problems is that I'm caught in a real Catch-22 situation. At present, I'm damned and publicly vilified because I refused to provide McIntyre with the data he requested. But had I acceded to McIntyre's initial request for climate model data, I'm convinced (based on the past experiences of Mike Mann, Phil, and Gavin) that I would have spent years of my scientific career dealing with demands for further explanations, additional data, Fortran code, etc. (Phil has been complying with FOIA requests from McIntyre and his cronies for over two years). And if I ever denied a single request for further information, McIntyre would have rubbed his hands gleefully and written: "You see - he's guilty as charged!" on his website.You and I have spent over a decade of our scientific careers on the MSU issue, Tom. During much of that time, we've had to do science in "reactive mode", responding to the latest outrageous claims and inept science by John Christy, David Douglass, or S. Fred Singer. For the remainder of my scientific career, I'd like to dictate my own research agenda. I don't want that agenda driven by the constant need to respond to Christy, Douglass, and Singer. And I certainly don't want to spend years of my life interacting with the likes of Steven McIntyre.
I hope LLNL management will provide me with their full support. If they do not, I'm fully prepared to seek employment elsewhere.
Email 1107, circulated among prominent warmists
Many of us were pleasantly surprised that our leading scientific societies have recently adopted such strong statements as to the reality and seriousness of anthropogenic climate change. There really is a scientific consensus, and it cannot be refuted or disproved by attacking any single data set.
I also think people need to come to understand that the scientific uncertainties work both ways. We don't understand cloud feedbacks. We don't understand air-sea interactions. We don't understand aerosol indirect effects. The list is long. Singer will say that uncertainties like these mean models lack veracity and can safely be ignored. What seems highly unlikely to me is that each of these uncertainties is going to make the climate system more robust against change. It is just as likely a priori that a poorly understood bit of physics might be a positive as a negative feedback.
[Mann]...Skepticism is essential for the functioning of science. It yields an erratic path towards eventual truth. But legitimate scientific skepticism is exercised through formal scientific circles, in particular the peer review process. A necessary though not in general sufficient condition for taking a scientific criticism seriously is that it has passed through the legitimate scientific peer review process. those such as McIntyre who operate almost entirely outside of this system are not to be trusted.
...Andrew Revkin wrote:
thanks heaps. tom crowley has sent me a direct challenge to mcintyre to start contributing to the reviewed lit or shut up. i'm going to post that soon....
[Mann] if McIntyre had a legitimate point, he would submit a comment to the journal in question. of course, the last time he tried that (w/ our '98 article in Nature), his comment was rejected. For all of the noise and bluster about the Steig et al Antarctic warming, its now nearing a year and nothing has been submitted. So more likely he won't submit for peer-reviewed scrutiny, or if it does get his criticism "published" it will be in the discredited contrarian home journal "Energy and Environment". I'm sure you are aware that McIntyre and his ilk realize they no longer need to get their crap published in legitimate journals. All they have to do is put it up on their blog, and the contrarian noise machine kicks into gear, pretty soon Druge, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and their ilk (in this case, The Telegraph were already on it this morning) are parroting the claims. And based on what? some guy w/ no credentials, dubious connections with the energy industry, and who hasn't submitted his claims to the scrutiny of peer review.
Fortunately, the prestige press doesn't fall for this sort of stuff, right?
mike
Stephen McIntyre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
McIntyre, a native of Ontario, attended the University of Toronto Schools, a university-preparatory school in Toronto, finishing first in the national high school mathematics competition of 1965...Although he was offered a graduate scholarship, McIntyre decided not to pursue studies in mathematical economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.[4]
McIntyre worked for 30 years in the mineral business...McIntyre says that during his career his skills in statistical analysis enabled him to analyse mineral prospecting data and out-bet his rivals/blockquote>
[Mike MacCracken] I really think we need to find a place where these discussions can occur--where "The Skeptics" have to actually put their arguments forward and can expect focused responses to be published (it might be best if the publication of the article and first response occurred at the same time, of course, and then further rounds can take place). And where "The Skeptics" can put their comments on the works of the scientific community and get a response--so where each can take on the other side. By trying to keep the scientific literature too pure, we can really contribute to "The Skeptics" going to the back rooms where they can argue that there is not some forum where we will interact with them...
[Michael Mann] Incidentally, the problems alluded to at GRL are of a different nature--there are simply too many papers, and too few editors w/ appropriate disciplinary expertise, to get many of the papers submitted there properly reviewed. Its simply hit or miss with respect to whom the chosen editor is. While it was easy to make sure that the worst papers, perhaps including certain ones Tom refers to, didn't see the light of the day at J. Climate, it was inevitable that such papers might slip through the cracks at e.g. GRL--there is probably little that can be done here, other than making sure that some qualified and responsible climate scientists step up to the plate and take on editorial positions at GRL.
Obama Plays Golf for the 30th Time This Year | The Blog on Obama: White House Dossier
It’s his 30th time golfing this year and the 88th golf outing of his presidency.
The life of Uganda's nomads - in pictures | World news | guardian.co.uk
East African herders won't be sending representatives to the climate change summit in Durban, but their fate depends on efforts there to curb global warming, as well as on governments' acceptance of their way of life
Climate change hits poor farmers
AS she surveys her small, bare plot in Zimbabwe's capital, farmer Janet Vambe knows something serious is happening, even if she has never heard of climate change.
"Long ago, I could set my calendar with the date the rains started," the 72-year-old said. Nowadays, "we have to gamble with the rains. If you plant early you might lose and if you plant late you might win. We are at a loss of what to do."
Has the Guardian published fauxtography? « Autonomous Mind
Nearly all photographs are processed in photoshop and a variety of adjustments are made for aesthetic and technical reasons. This photograph will have been adjusted within those conventions and regulations.
Trenberth The Missing Heat Fraudster | Real Science
...Now that the climategate letters are out, I understand what that was all about. The models did not show any missing heat, and Trenberth needed missing heat to keep funding coming in. So rather than being honest about it, he made up a nonsensical anti-science story about heat sinking undetected to the bottom of the ocean.
Paleoclimate – Rotten to the core « the Air Vent
Climategate 2 is more interesting than climategate 1 for several reasons. We’ve seen the infilling of several conversational lines in the original emails, numerous references to funding, corruption and information control, there is additonal reason to believe the IPCC was corrupted by political aims and the thought processes in paleoclimate are more clear. It will take months to sort the whole thing out but in the meantime, we can understand that the core of thermometer paloclimatology is as rotten as any tree in the forest.
Eight Of The Ten Warmest Texas Winters Occurred Before 1960 | Real Science
Texas’ warmest winter was in 1907, followed by 1952 and 1911.
The Russians and Japanese say that without the US, they are not interested. Ditto China and India. That leaves only Germany of the top six national emitters still in favour of a binding deal.
Even optimists don't think US politicians will be in the mood to consummate a new deal until 2016 at the earliest. The best that can be hoped for is a "coalition of the willing" committed to a stop-gap extension of the Kyoto protocol which does not include the US. We are facing a "lost decade" in climate talks.
Most of the US Senate barely believes in climate change, let alone doing anything about it. Most other nations play lip service, but blame economic travails for postponing hard decisions. Some think the recession will buy us time. Not so. Last year saw the biggest annual increase in carbon dioxide emissions ever recorded – almost 6 per cent. This was mostly due to China, India and others burning more coal, the dirtiest fuel.
...[Q] Even so, the climate forecast is bad, right?
Dreadful.
Obama won’t fund UN climate fund « Don Surber
So they are lying to the public, lying to the government and lying to one another. The motivation? Oh, I can think of 100 billion reasons.
Me? I have no skin in the game. I just have a better detector for manure than my moral and intellectual superiors.
Chinese Solar Industry Goes Belly Up | Via Meadia
One of the big arguments proponents of the ‘green jobs’ scam often bring out is that the argument that China, thanks to its support of green tech companies, will own the future while the United States is left behind.
Think again. According to a report on Bloomberg, the Chinese solar power industry is on the ropes; massive over investment has run up against flat demand. Margins have turned negative at some companies where solar panels can only be sold below cost.
McKitrick on the IPCC | Climate Etc.
JC comments: I think McKitrick’s analysis of the problems with the IPCC is good, and his recommendations are worthwhile. But IMO the problems with the IPCC are fundamentally structural. The IPCC connection to the UNFCCC, the narrow framing of the scientific problem, and the consensus seeking approach are the key problems IMO. Further, the way the IPCC is set up, it can pretty much ignore the recommendations from IAC (and presumably just about anyone else for that matter). The key issue is whether the national governments are happy (or not) with what is going on with the IPCC. Richared Tol has argued on a previous thread that the national governments seem to be happy with the IPCC.
Tee Time Anyone? | Real Science
With temperatures at a balmy -58F on the rapidly melting ice sheet, golf looks tempting today. Look for frostbite in about 30 seconds.
What Happened To Russia? | Real Science
In July, 2010 the weather in Moscow defined climate for the whole planet. Now that Russia is having record cold, alarmists have lost all interest in the place.
1845 Shock News : Alaskan Glacier Retreated Four Feet Per Day From 1794 To 1845 | Real Science
Every six hours, the glacier retreated by one foot – back when CO2 was a very safe 280 ppm. This is the same glacier which Obama’s fraudsters at EPA claim started retreating in 1941.
On the eve of their departure for Moscow, however, the U.K. group learned about the addition of several well-known "skeptics" in the climate change debate. The list included Stockholm University's Nils-Axel Mörner, who has cast doubts on claims of rising sea levels, British climate maverick Piers Corbyn, and the Pasteur Institute's Paul Reiter, who disputes predictions that infectious diseases will explode as temperatures rise. The new program was "unacceptable" to King, says Peter Cox of the U.K.'s Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Exeter. "We knew that we would not get to the scientific issues if we went down every rabbit hole of skepticism."
date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 09:38:13 -0700 from: "Malcolm Hughes" <mhughes@ltrr.arizona.edu subject: Re: letter to Senate to: "Michael E. Mann" <mann@virginia.edu>, Michael Oppenheimer <omichael@Princeton.EDU>
Colleagues, I'm very torn between being drawn into endless exchanges outside normal scientific discourse (e.g. tit-for-tat with the Idsos group) and leaving the field open to them. They clearly have the resources to do fairly careful literature searches, even if there are some serious conceptual problems in their writings, and there is a real audience for their kind of materials, both in print publication and on the web. I fear that you would find more colleagues and grad students than you would like to think read their materials and are influenced by them. Apart from anything else they respond better to the heavily referenced articles by Idso or Soon than to "ex cathedra" statements like the recent editorial by Barnett and Somerville. I know this to be the case in the paleo community, although there the picture is complicated by the differences in scientific approach of those working on interannual to century time scales (i.e. folks like us) and those working on millennial and longer time scales (notably Wally Broecker, Wijbjorn Karlen, but many others too). One consequence of this intersection of differing sources of scepticism (sensu stricto) is that an appeal to the NAS could be counterproductive - remember the poor treatment of high-res paleo in the NAS report requested by the White House the other year. Let's learn from these guys. We don't have to strain to publish in the peer- reviewed literature - it's our normal way of working. We do have to find a more effective way of publicizing and interpreting these publications, when appropriate, to a wider audience, including policy makers. How best to do this? Cheers, Malcolm
Papal infallibility - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In connection with papal infallibility, the Latin phrase ex cathedra (literally, "from the chair") has been defined as meaning "when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, (the Bishop of Rome) defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church
If you guessed Ben "Beat the Crap out of Pat Michaels" Santer, you're a winner! Your prize is 100% of the cash that I've been awarded for running this blog over the last four years.
Scientific Basis of Global Warming Scare Crumbling, Experts Say | Heartlander Magazine
[1997] A much-quoted sentence in the official summary statement of the UN-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states that ". . . the balance of evidence suggests that there is a discernible human influence on global climate." However, extensive interviews carried out by Kerr with leading climate experts reveal growing skepticism over just how much scientists really know. Kerr quotes Benjamin Santer, one of the IPCC report's lead authors, as saying: "It's unfortunate that many people read the media hype before they read the [IPCC] chapter" on the detection of greenhouse warming. "I think the caveats are there. We say quite clearly that few scientists would say the attribution issue was a done deal."
In the same issue of Broadcasting & Cable magazine in which Al Gore described the public's deep yearning for Current TV, former ABC anchor (and current NBC Rock Center special correspondent ) Ted Koppel issued one of his lectures on how the elite media has lost its way amidst all the rabble and their incessant partisan blogging and partisan cable news.
To Koppel, the nation was much better off when it was guided by a small and wise (and supposedly nonpartisan) national media elite that had the brains to separate the wheat from the chaff of information and tell the public how it should think. That's all been ruined now by the "democratization of journalism," and the public will ruin the country with their incessantly partisan ravings.
Email 555:
cc: "Folland, Chris" <chris.folland@metoffice.gov.uk>, Hans.von.Storch@gkss.de, Keith Briffa <k.briffa@uea.ac.uk>, "Brohan, Philip" <philip.brohan@metoffice.gov.uk>, Eduardo.Zorita@gkss.de date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:29:03 +0100 from: Hans.von.Storch@gkss.de subject: Re: FW: More on the "Hocky Stick" to: "Tett, Simon" <simon.tett@metoffice.gov.uk>
Simon, I think one should list three publications which have stirred some disucsions, namely ours, the one by Anders Moberg and colleagues and Steve Mcintyre's in GRL. I would assign the following significance ot these articles (just among us, please): -- ours: methodical basis for hockey stick reconstruction is weak; discussion was unwisely limited by IPCC declaring MBH to be "true". (Stupid, politicized action by IPCC, not MBH's responsbilkity. IPCC did one more of these silly oversellings - by showing the damage curve by Munich Re without proper caveat in the fig caption); -- Moberg: an alternative suggestion - this may turn out to be more or lesa accurate at a later time, but it is at least a serious hypothesis, which is consistent with the independent bore hole reconstruction and our model simulations. -- Mc&Mc: As far as I can say (we did not redo the analysis, but Francis Zwires did) the identfied glitch is real. One should not do it this way. ...Cheers Hans Hans von Storch
...
Keith/Hans/Chris, Defra do ask the impossible! Can you help me? Are there other papers I should be aware of? Hans/Chris are the statistical criticisms of Mackintyre and McKitrick OK? Philip -- do you have any thoughts? [Beyond that the paleo community cannot do stats!] (Keith/Hans we can claim to the EU that SOAP is informing policy now!) Simon Dr Simon Tett Managing Scientist, Data development and applications. Met Office Hadley Centre (Reading Unit)
2004 ClimateGate email from Michael Mann:
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:22:02 -0500 To: Phil Jones <???@uea.ac.uk> From: "Michael E. Mann" <???@virginia.edu> Subject: Re: Fw: Rutherford et al. [2004] X-UEA-
Phil, I would immediately delete anything you receive from this fraud.
You've probably seen now the paper by Wahl and Ammann which independently exposes McIntyre and McKitrick for what it is--pure crap. Of course, we've already done this on "RealClimate", but Wahl and Ammann is peer-reviewed and independent of us. I've attached it in case you haven't seen (please don't pass it along to others yet). It should be in press shortly. Meanwhile, I would NOT RESPOND to this guy. As you know, only bad things can come of that. The last thing this guy cares about is honest debate--he is funded by the same people as Singer, Michaels, etc... Other than this distraction, I hope you're enjoying the holidays too... talk to you soon, mike
[Mann] Good editorial on #CRUHack2 in The Economist: emails actually show science working as it should (robust debate, etc.)
1997 ClimateGate email:
From: Joseph Alcamo <alcamo@usf.uni-kassel.de> To: m.hulme@uea.ac.uk, Rob.Swart@rivm.nl Subject: Timing, Distribution of the Statement Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:52:33 0100 Reply-to: alcamo@usf.uni-kassel.de
Mike, Rob,
Sounds like you guys have been busy doing good things for the cause.
I would like to weigh in on two important questions --
Distribution for Endorsements -- I am very strongly in favor of as wide and rapid a distribution as possible for endorsements. I think the only thing that counts is numbers. The media is going to say "1000 scientists signed" or "1500 signed". No one is going to check if it is 600 with PhDs versus 2000 without. They will mention the prominent ones, but that is a different story.
Conclusion -- Forget the screening, forget asking them about their last publication (most will ignore you.) Get those names!
Timing -- I feel strongly that the week of 24 November is too late. 1. We wanted to announce the Statement in the period when there was a sag in related news, but in the week before Kyoto we should expect that we will have to crowd out many other articles about climate. 2. If the Statement comes out just a few days before Kyoto I am afraid that the delegates who we want to influence will not have any time to pay attention to it. We should give them a few weeks to hear about it. 3. If Greenpeace is having an event the week before, we should have it a week before them so that they and other NGOs can further spread the word about the Statement. On the other hand, it wouldn't be so bad to release the Statement in the same week, but on a diffeent day. The media might enjoy hearing the message from two very different directions.
---------------------------------------------------- Prof. Dr. Joseph Alcamo, Director Center for Environmental Systems Research University of Kassel Kurt Wolters Strasse 3 D-34109 Kassel Germany
Email 476:
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:52:15 -0500 To: Andy Revkin <anrevk@nytimes.com> From: Athanasios Koutavas <koutavas@mit.edu>
...
Even in the (unlikely) absence of a human impact on climate we would still need to worry about natural abrupt climate change. It's true that by comparison with the glacial world, the interglacial climate has been less "angry". But it has not been stable and it has not varied smoothly, and it can certainly wreak havoc in regions strained by overpopulation or by scarce food and water resources, typically found in the tropics and subtropics.
-----
Very belated, and prompted in part by what seems an overly hyped Fortune magazine article on evidence for near-term abrupt change driven by warming, i'm actually going to commit journalism soon on the subject.What I'd like to do is clarify what is known, unknown and perhaps unknowable as we look at the past (younger dryas etc), and ahead (fram
strait trends etc). My sense is that Wally B's notion that the 'angry beast' is a creature of colder eras but not of warmer times has some support. I'd like to get more familiar with the data and/or theory that supports that.Also, separately, been intrigued by Richard Seager's analysis of importance of air flows instead of ocean flows in modulating European climate. Is that relevant to the abruptness question? This is also prompted by my focus on Arctic recently.
Any trenchant thoughts about these matters appreciated. could start with simple statement from you giving your feeling about whether evidence is building supporting the prospect for a warmer-world angry beast or whether it is eroding?
...
andy [Revkin]
Battery fires prompt govt probe of Chevy Volt
WASHINGTON (AP) -- New fires involving the lithium-ion batteries in General Motors Co.'s Chevrolet Volt have prompted an investigation to assess the risk of fire in the electric car after a serious crash, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said Friday.
- Bishop Hill blog - Coining it
Email 3989 covers a consultancy tender by CRU staff. The tender is for AEA, an environmental consultancy.
We learn that the day rates are as follows:
>> Phil: £750
>> Tim, Rachel, Anthony, Aldina, William, Clare: £550
>> Maureen: £450
I’m not sure what Brian Williams or Heidi Cullen were smoking back then, but they apparently weren’t watching the news much. Like the day in April, 1974 when 148 tornadoes hit the US.
Guardian : We Are All Soviet Pravda Now | Real Science
The aren’t interested in the malfeasance being exposed in the E-mails, only in punishing the whistle blower.
Twitter / @hipsterproblems: it just dawned on me: i am ...
it just dawned on me: i am the only one at this family dinner who believes in global warming. #hipsterproblems #OnlyHipsterAtThanksgiving
Twitter / @BillyHallowell: RT @BuckSexton those who s ...
RT @BuckSexton those who still think climate change is a global threat are the real 'flat-earthers' of the 21st century forbes.com/sites/jamestay…
Now let’s return to reality. It only takes a freshman engineering student to explain the utter folly of this system. Breaking it down in steps we have: wind > wind turbine rotor > wind generator > AC electricity > DC electricity > electrolysis > hydrogen > pump/storage vessel > gas turbine > generator > AC electricity > transmission lines > consumer. That’s a long chain of energy transformation steps. Unfortunately though, each step involves LOSSES.
Of course, none of the media, politcians or greens even bothered to calculate the efficiency and cost of this system. But thankfully Keil has, and reached a grand efficiency of 19%, meaning 81% of the energy is lost as heat into the atmosphere. According to Keil with such a system electricity will end up costing the consumer over $1.00 per kwh.
Gillard — the Australian Prime Minister — got the timing perfectly wrong.
Within two weeks of the Carbon Tax finally becoming Law, it’s becoming hard not to notice that the whole Global Scam is fragmenting. This Carbon ship is on fire, the lifeboats are leaving, the rats are jumping, and the Australian team just turned up with the family jewels. Their policies are “take no prisoners” and “bring no life jackets”. Their exit plan is to have No Exit.
The Dissonance Begins | Real Science
“The core scientists may be lacking integrity, but that doesn’t mean the science is wrong”
ROFLMAO
Brendan DeMelle | Did UK Police Quietly Sideline ‘Climategate’ Hacker Investigation?
The ongoing harassment of climate scientists – including death threats in several cases – cannot be ignored by law enforcement agencies.
Articles: Obama's Green War Continues
The Obama Regime has pursued a Green religious crusade on energy policy. Part of this crusade --the soft option, so to say--has been to lavishly subsidize every kind of so-called "green energy" business (such as solar power, wind power, and ethanol), no matter how inefficient it might be.
The preferred tool the Green Regime employs is the covert subsidy -- that is, taxpayer-backed loan guarantees. The company that gets these loan guarantees can borrow freely from the private sector large sums, no matter how financially weak the company is, to capitalize its operations, and until it actually hits the wall and the taxpayer gets hosed (as in the notorious Solyndra case), nobody sees what is going on.
Forget Green Energy: Oil And Gas Are Boosting U.S. Employment.
So President Obama was right all along. Domestic energy production really is a path to prosperity and new job creation. His mistake was predicting that those new jobs would be "green," when the real employment boom is taking place in oil and gas.
- Bishop Hill blog - Why Tyndall sponsored CMEP
Email 2496 explains why the Tyndall Centre funded the Harrabin/Smith seminars - the Real World seminars of the Cambridge Media and Environment Programme
Mike Hulme:
Did anyone hear Stott vs. Houghton on Today, radio 4 this morning? Woeful stuff really. This is one reason why Tyndall is sponsoring the Cambridge Media/Environment Programme to starve this type of reporting at source.
This is what bad energy policy looks like: as the US dithers over Canadian tar sands oil, China is ready to buy. Access to reliable oil from a friendly neighboring country like Canada is one of America’s greatest geopolitical blessings. Throwing this away would be the height of folly; those seem to be heights we are eager to scale.
What is altogether new at this year’s climate summit is that even climate alarmism appears to have received a dose of cold water. The latest scientific research findings are certainly facilitating a growing number of climate delayers who are promoting an international wait-and-see strategy, a new diplomatic approach that is becoming increasingly fashionable among advocates of climate Realpolitik.
OPEC and Obama Team Up to Fight Major Energy Breakthrough
If you believe we’re going to live in a utopia of solar panels and windmills, think the world is coming to an end because of carbon dioxide, or happen to be an Arab sheik that's made a fortune off of America’s endless thirst for oil, you’re not going to like the change.
But if you want to invest in the future of American energy — and make some "evil" profits by helping accelerate the real American energy boom — then you’re going to like where things are headed...
Five Indians named 2012 Rhodes Scholars
Ishan Nath from Georgia is a senior at Stanford where he will receive Bachelors’ degrees in Economics and Earth
Systems, and with a minor in Mathematics.His senior thesis focuses on clean energy and a national cap-and-trade emissions trading system. [a mind is a terrible thing to waste]
the progressive warming of the whole globe which appeared to be observable in the 1990s appears, since the millennium, to have plateaued.
No one really knows why. (A good guess is the Chinese sulphur aerosol: China's vast, exploding carbon emissions are accompanied by huge emissions of sulphur dioxide, which have the effect of cooling, rather than warming the atmosphere.) Yet that's not what matters.
Contrarians File for Intellectual Bankruptcy « Anti-Climate Change Extremism in Utah
[Warmist Barry BIckmore] As a working scientist, none of the quotes I have seen has been even remotely surprising
Lack of top level ambition undermining EU commitment to climate change | New Europe
Ireland, apparently, isn’t concerned about climate change; the government has abandoned a bill that would have set binding targets for an 80% reduction in net carbon emissions by 2050, established a national climate change strategy and introduced annual carbon budgets, all of which have now been jettisoned.
Twitter / @Revkin: Flirts with..? I try to be ...
Flirts with..? I try to be in "show me" mode 24/7. "@JunkScience: Climategate 2.0: Revkin flirts with skepticism wp.me/pyHMP-1Gg"
New Study Suggests Climate Change May Be (Slightly) Less Severe Than Feared - Ecocentric - TIME.com
Newsflash: predicting the future is really hard, and trying to predict how something as complicated as the climate system will change in the future—without even being able to be sure of how inputs into that system like carbon emissions will change—is really, really hard. It could turn out that the climate system is much more sensitive to carbon buildup than we've thought—as some scientists have suggested—and that a doubling of the carbon in the atmosphere from pre-industrial times could lead to a temperature increase of as much as 10 C over the next century, which would mean an altogether different planet. Or it's possible that the climate system may be more resistant to carbon than we think, and warming could proceed relatively slowly. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, for its part, has estimated that temperatures would rise by about 3 C after a doubling of carbon concentrations.
What this means is that it's not quite true when environmental advocates say that the "science is settled," as Al Gore has. The basics absolutely—but beyond that, there's a whole lot of science left to do, as a new paper shows.
...But given how often we're reporting dire climate news on this blog, I'm thankful on Thanksgiving for a study that indicates we may have a little more time to save ourselves. And climate skeptics take note: this study, which could dismay the most hysterical climate activists [Walsh links to Romm here], was published in one of the most prestigious journals in the world, not hidden away.
EU carbon price tumbles to new low | Australian Climate Madness
Carbon prices have shed more than half their value since June
[David "Climate Nuremberg" Roberts] I got my job without a day's experience in journalism or environmentalism -- I just happened to see an ad for an assisant editor on Craiglist and my long, overwrought cover letter happened to reach the right person. I was Grist's fifth full-time employee; I think we're up to 25 or so.
...I might have gone to Monster.com instead of Craigslist and ended up back in my soul-sapping job writing marketing copy for Microsoft.
Climate change summit: aim for the top | Editorial | Comment is free | The Guardian
The will to act on climate change is out of political energy, running on empty. The problem is (relatively) distant, complex and intractable.
South Africa – where climate change may trigger a toxic timebomb | Environment | guardian.co.uk
Climate change, she says, increases the volume of rainwater, allowing the mines to flood more frequently, and the water courses and rivers to become even more polluted.
South Florida feels effect of climate change - St. Petersburg Times
But some of the effects of global warming have already arrived in South Florida, as coastal cities flood more frequently and overheated corals turn white and die. The region's temperatures have not gone up, however, and many scientists say climate change has had little effect on hurricanes.
...Although South Florida is considered among the most vulnerable parts of the United States to climate change, the region has so far escaped the most obvious consequence: higher air temperatures.
Controlling "climate forcers" can save millions of lives: UN report
LONDON, Nov. 25 (Xinhua) -- Controlling certain pollutants can save millions of lives and help fight climate change, a UN report released on Friday has found.
The so-called "short-lived climate forcers" are a group of substances such as methane, black carbon, tropospheric ozone and hydrofluorocarbons which have a significant impact on near-term climate change. They can pollute the air and have negative impacts on human health and agricultural crops.
The report says if recommended measures are fully implemented, some 2.5 million lives can be saved and crop losses of 32 million tonnes can be avoided annually.
Compiled by the UN Environment Program (UNEP) and funded by the Government of Sweden, the report further adds global temperatures can be controlled by half a degree Celcius by 2040.
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.”
Outlook bleak as rich polluters fail biggest test
I have just spent 10 days travelling across Africa to assess the impact of climate change. From north to south, the broad observations are remarkably similar. More floods, droughts, storms and changing seasons are being experienced: the heatwaves are getting longer and more frequent; the storms more intense; the night-time temperatures higher; the farmers see new diseases and pests; and the growing seasons appear disrupted. On top of that, the marginal areas are turning to desert and cities are becoming unbearably hot. The peer-reviewed science is sketchy but it's the best there is in a continent starved of research funds and it is consistent with the latest models done by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Climategate II: the scientists fight back - Telegraph
Yet disturbing questions remain. One email protests, for example, that “science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it”, another says “there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individuals and by IPCC”. And, like last time, there is evidence of attempts to evade Freedom of Information requests. These cry out for urgent investigation
But most of these objections were made by climate scientists – as was the revelation of the Himalayan howler – which scarcely suggests a wide conspiracy to deceive. The emails do destroy the myth of motiveless, disinterested paragons which some scientists have tried to foster – but then no-one else really believed it anyway. And the science itself remains sound, based on a wide variety of sources and studies and so far not invalidated by anything that has emerged from either Climategate.
Study Finds Limited Sensitivity of Climate to CO2 - NYTimes.com
Berger provides useful context from Andrew Dessler, a climate scientist at Texas A&M University, who noted that most people publishing on this question have long seen very low odds of runaway or extreme warming:
My sense is that most scientists consider the very high end of the sensitivity range… to be pretty unlikely (although it cannot be ruled out)…. In other words, I was not terribly worried about runaway climate change before this. After all, we know that the Earth’s had much higher CO2 in the past (and the temperature were correspondingly much higher), and the Earth did not turn into Venus.
Renewable Power Trumps Fossils for First Time as UN Talks Stall
Electricity from the wind, sun, waves and biomass attracted $187 billion last year compared with $157 billion for natural gas, oil and coal, according to calculations by Bloomberg New Energy Finance using the most recent data.
Climategate 2: The Inquisition « The Daily Bayonet
That’s at least three questions Hickman is investigating. Which is three more questions than he’s asked of climate scientists openly discussing deletion of emails, subverting the FOIA process and bullying peers into submission.
It’s hacktastic. Richard Nixon would have given his
rightleft arm to have lived with what we call journalism today
Edward Cook tells Phil Jones that Mike Mann is “serious enemy” and “vindictive”. Mike Mann had criticized his work.
Apparently Mann went “a little crazy” over a paper showing the Medeival Warm Period exists.
» ‘You’ve Been Gored’: The Climate Change Fraud - Big Government
Over the next several weeks, BigGovernment.com will serialize portions of YOU’VE BEEN GORED.
This video: The Climate Is Not A-Changin’
will give you a taste of what’s to come. It is an anthem for people who’ve had a belly full of Al Gore, elitist hypocrisy and radical environmentalism.
A Somewhat Late Response to Schneider « Climate Audit
10 years before that email was sent, I was a grad student in economics, planning to do my PhD on carbon taxes. When trying to learn about the physical science issues, one of the first things I read was a 1989 Scientific American article by Schneider. Probably many people first learned about the issue from Schneider’s writings, and over time he had an enormous influence on the way the scientific message was controlled and transmitted to the public and to policymakers. He edited a major journal, wrote UN climate reports, advised governments and generally spoke for his profession for several decades.
That he turns out to have been intensely biased, arrogant and careless with facts matters a great deal.
Last big chill suggests lower climate impact of carbon
Glacial periods are triggered by small changes in the Earth's orbit. These aren't enough by themselves to alter the global climate, but they set off a drop in atmospheric CO2 and an expansion of ice, which reflects sunlight back to space. These feedbacks help the Earth enter a deep chill during glacial periods.
By quietly withholding the second batch of E-mails, he/she got them to perjure themselves at inquiries based on what they thought was undetectable after the first batch.
Twitter / @Revkin: Guess it's good news @junk ...
EU Referendum: Collapse of a policy
In theory, the price of the EU permits was supposed to increase, providing a ratchet effect, forcing a gradual reduction of emissions in line with the piece increase.
But, as is being widely reported today the carbon price crashed to a five-year low of €7.040, a drop attributed to the effect of the sovereign debt crisis on European industrial production.
The problems with emissions trading : Nature News & Comment
The Alberta report found a lack of standards for how agricultural credits were verified — not one of the credits the auditors checked could be confirmed.
- Bishop Hill blog - More tips
#4101 - Edward Cook tells Phil Jones that Mike Mann is "serious enemy" and "vindictive". Mike Mann had criticized his work.
#4091 – Phil Jones tries to teach a statistician to suck eggs, and gets his ass handed to him.
#4025 – Keith Briffa questions Mike Mann’s objectivity
#0497 - Jones falls out with Mann
The Reference Frame: Jones and Mann in Tahiti: and many other e-mails
Maybe you should look: not all those 5,300 are boring. ;-)
Why climategate is a catastrophe for science - FT.com
The public has grown weary of being scared into surrendering rights and money
Eyewitness News: S.Africans disregard climate change
A new study suggests many South Africans are nonchalant about the threat posed by global warming.
5,000 leaked emails reveal scientists deleted evidence that cast doubt on claims climate change was man-made Experts were under orders from US and UK officials to come up with a 'strong message' Critics claim: 'The stink of intellectual corruption is overpowering' Scientist asks, 'What if they find that climate change is a natural fluctuation? They'll kill us all'
Europe knows that times have changed since the heady days when Al Gore could demand $100 000 for a 45-minute climate crisis talk and an all-paid Gulfstream jet to transport himself and his clique. At best the EU's 27 member states, plus oil and gas-producing Norway, and maybe two or three other countries would sign up for a second Kyoto period. The impact of this on worlwide emissions and their rate of growth would be so small it would be laughable - and this is now openly admitted by the Commission.
Twitter / @MichaelEMann: The Daily Mash on #CRUHack ...
The Daily Mash on #CRUHack2: "Leaked climate emails force carbon dioxide to resign" bit.ly/tDAQLW #climategate #climatechange
WASHINGTON, Nov. 25, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Senator James Inhofe recently met with Representatives of CFACT and invited CFACT to co-sponsor a press conference at COP17, the UN Conference on Climate Change, tentatively scheduled for Monday, December 5th.
The "dark cloud" version is obviously, and fraudulently (for propaganda purposes) enhanced, as you can tell by the simple fact that the smokestack itself is pitch black, all around (even on what should be the sunlit side) in that version. In the photo showing white smoke, the smokestack is normally lighted. Fakery, fraud, propaganda, artistic license to evoke an emotional reaction -- it is all of those, and obviously so in my opinion.---
11 19 11 3 56 McCain Climate change - YouTube
McCain: "We can emphasize sustainability...I believe that climate change is real, but until we convince the American people that we can attain progress in that area through helping make money...we're not going to be able to achieve much of a result."
Kyoto Pollution Curbs May Lapse on UN Deadlock - Bloomberg
European Union carbon permits dropped as much as 11.5 percent today, losing almost one-fourth of their value this week, as slower economic growth and Europe’s debt crisis held back factory production. United Nations emissions credits plummeted to a record low of 4.6 euros in a move that reflected concerns about the outcome of the climate summit, said Per Lekander, a Paris-based analyst at UBS AG.
...
“Let’s be frank: At best we could only get the EU, Norway and maybe two or three more countries to sign up for a second Kyoto period,” Hedegaard said this week in Oslo. “That will not make any difference whatsoever for the overall trend in global emissions. It would also take away pressure from other countries, both developed and developing, to engage in more ambitious climate action.”
I've been monitoring this for weeks, and today it has set it's minimum value for at least the last five years, which was for € 7.96, on the close of Feb 12, 2009, as can be seen in the graph below (from Bloomberg). The dive seems clearly related to the Climategate 2.0 revelations, since it closed at € 9.04 on Tuesday, diving more than 20% since then. These are definitely good news for Durban...
RMI’s Reinventing Fire Cuts Carbon by 82% While Saving $5 Trillion
Introducing the book, Lovins said, “Humans are inventing a new fire–not dug from below but flowing from above, not scarce but bountiful, not local but everywhere. This new fire is not transient but permanent…and grown in ways that sustain and endure. Each of you owns a piece of that $5-trillion prize.”
Even more impressive, said Lovins, in an interview on NPR’s Science Friday that this can be done by private industry, at a profit, thereby circumvention the stalemate in Congress.
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Reinventing Fire: Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era
Other opportunities include less driving (eg. insurance based on miles driven cuts mileage 8% - 'PAYD;' car-pooling - spontaneous and standardized), lower speed limits.
...
Joe Romm and Paul Krugman add some intersting points regarding solar power. In most applications, it competes with retail prices, not the far lower wholesale prices because it is hooked up on a roof and plugged directly into the grid - avoiding expensive transmission. Costs are declining are 7%/year.
A meaningful Durban treaty would be a triumph of weak over strong | Environment | guardian.co.uk
[Pie-throwing warmist Mark Lynas] Tough, legally binding targets are the only way to tackle climate change – but powerful, high emitting nations will be stubborn...The stakes could not be higher. [The accompanying photo encourages us to believe that the haze in Calcutta is carbon dioxide.]
Al Fin: ClimateGate 2: Another Round of Defections Coming Up?
The spotlight is on, and the heat is being turned up on the warmist conspiracy of scam artists. And this is only Act II. Just wait until after the intermission, when the action really begins to pick up.
Record snowfall - Local - The Telegram
Meeting the predictions of forecasters and then tacking on a bit more of the white stuff for good measure, almost 30 centimetres of snow dropped on St. John’s by midday Thursday.
It was a new single-day record for November in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Russia’s South Hit by Record Low Temperatures, Center Says - Bloomberg
Today’s temperatures of minus 19.1 degrees Celsius in Volgograd in the Southern federal district, and minus 16 degrees
...Winter crops are “not in a very good shape” in southern Russia because of the weather conditions, Alexander Korbut, the Grain Union’s vice president, said yesterday.
Celsius in Vladikavkaz in the North-Caucasus federal district are the lowest for this date since 1993, the weather center said
on its website. In Makhachkala, which is in the North-Caucasus district, the minus 13.6 degrees Celsius temperature is the
coldest registered since 1889, it said.
European Union Commissioner Connie Hedegaard on the Durban climate talks - YouTube
[There is a climate change crisis. There are hungry people in the Horn of Africa, therefore CO2 is overheating the planet. "You have so much evidence!"]]
Earth highly unlikely to suffer severe warming - new science • The Register
Climate scientists funded by the US government have announced new research in which they have established that the various doomsday global warming scenarios are in fact extremely unlikely to occur, and that the scenarios considered likeliest - and used for planning by the world's governments - are overly pessimistic.
DFID Bloggers » Whatever happened to climate change?
Has the American-rooted 'climate change denial' movement had more effect than we know?
For myself, having been at Copenhagen, I remember the great optimism in the build up. I remember meeting President Mohamed Nasheed of the Maldives and listening to his passionate advocacy of tough new protocols amid the rising sea levels that threaten the very existence of his nation.
And I also remember the trauma of failure: the dank, dark cloud of despair that gripped diplomats, politicians, scientists and journalists alike as agreements fell apart and the summit appeared to end in calamitous failure.
How Much Will the Earth Warm Up? - NYTimes.com
Dr. Schmidt agreed that a warming of 4.1 degrees Fahrenheit is “plenty big enough to cause all sorts of problems.”
Help us find clues in climate email hacker's message | Leo Hickman | Environment | guardian.co.uk
I have annotated all the places in the file which I think are of potential interest - and explained why. (Click on the yellow tabs on the file below to read the annotations.)
The science of climate change is firmer than it ever was. A 2C-4C temperature rise still means that Africa fries and the polar bears die out, that Bangladesh and Egypt drown, the droughts in Latin America and Ethiopia continue to worsen, and the poorest communities and small-island states, who have the least resources to adapt, will be hurt the hardest.
Here we are, they say, in the midst of a 10-year drought and food crisis in Africa, with unprecedented flooding in south-east Asia and Central America, and North America, Australia and Europe having just had some of their most extreme climatic years ever. Emissions and temperatures are higher than ever, people everywhere are genuinely concerned, but the big emitters are still not prepared to do anything. What more do they need to be persuaded to act swiftly?
Any postponement of a deal, they say, is not just dangerous politics, it is criminal negligence, consigning the poor to oblivion. If treasuries can find trillions to bail out dodgy banks, if financiers can be paid hundreds of millions in bonuses and the politics of Europe can be redrawn in just a few weeks, then why can't the rich and big-emitting countries make a deal to try to avert what could be the greatest problem the planet has faced? In short, why are world leaders gambling with the fate of the planet?
Of emails and scientific research | Planet3.0
Take a look at this email written by Raymond Bradley:
I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year “reconstruction”.
Bradley was one of the authors of the original hockey stick graph, along with Michael Mann. But he clearly thinks that a subsequent reconstruction (which largely agrees with his own) done by his former collaborator is not very good. He says so in very strong language, and when asked about it by the New York Times he stood by his earlier complaints and made it clear that he expressed his disagreement directly to Michael Mann.
This example, and many more contained within the emails, show a healthy skepticism within the scientific community.
Flashback: Chilling Intolerance for Free Speech on Global Warming
"When we've finally gotten serious about global warming, when the impacts are really hitting us and we're in a full worldwide scramble to minimize the damage, we should have war crimes trials for these bastards - some sort of climate Nuremberg." -David Roberts, Gristmill, Grist Magazine, September 19, 2006
So said Grist Magazine staff writer David Roberts of those who question looming global warming doom. They are war criminals and should be tried and prosecuted the same way as Nazi Germany leaders.1 In his words, global warming doubters "have blood on their hands" and are "morally if not legally, criminals."2
Posts
All Comments
