- Bishop Hill blog - Is this a clue?

At the moment, we don't know if the police are investigating a hacking of the CRU servers or if it is a case of a leaking of information by someone internal to UEA. But wait! If, as CRU seem to suggest, the information was hacked, what possible relevance could correspondence between Jones and Palmer be to the inquiry? If on the other hand the information was compiled for an FoI request that was subsequently rejected, then it makes perfect sense that the Jones/Palmer correspondence is relevant.

Letter to Gavin Esler BBC Presenter "Newsnight"

[Letter from Piers Corbyn Msc (astrophysics), ARCS, FRAS, FRMetS, WeatherAction long range weather and climate forecaster.] We at WeatherAction predicted this very cold weather SIX months ago using solar activity (nothing to do with CO2) and added extra detail weeks ahead. Our forecasts of EXTREME events are consistently 85% reliable.

EPA’s Tailoring Rule: Temporary, Dubious, Incomplete Antidote to Massachusetts v. EPA’s Legacy of Absurd Resuls (Part 2) — MasterResource

EPA is taking an enormous gamble. The Agency is betting that, through the Tailoring Rule, it can control the regulatory cascade set in motion by its endangerment finding. But the Tailoring Rule is legally dubious, and even if courts allow EPA to amend the PSD and Title V permitting programs, the endangerment finding is precedent for a NAAQS rulemaking, which could damage the economy even more than would a PSD/Title V administrative morass.

Having sown the wind, EPA risks reaping a whirlwind of angry opposition from governors, mayors, congressional appropriators, small business, unions, talk radio, etc. No agency likes to surrender power, and for EPA there is no power more seductive than the power to regulate CO2, which would expand the Agency’s reach to virtually every nook and cranny in the economy. Once unleashed, however, the coveted power is subject to the vagaries of litigation. EPA may find itself responsible a regulatory chain reaction it cannot control.

Common sense from a reader | The SPPI Blog

I’m still in the process of reading your articles about corals and CO2, but I long ago understood that the record of paleoclimate history demonstrates that very high atmospheric CO2 and temperature levels have occured in the past and it did not result in coral extinctions.

Also, global sea levels have risen and fallen by about 400 feet during each repetition of the Ice Age cycle, with a rise in sea level that was sometimes rather rapid, and the resilient corals have always survived these changes of global temperature, temperature, and sea levels.

The same can be said of most of the other species on the planet. The Ice Age Megafauna survived the stresses of many Ice Age cycles, until the Upper Paleolithic human hunters came along and added a new stress. The Ice Age Megafauna had evolved and survived in tandem with the Ice Ages, and it doesn’t appear likely that ‘climate change’ made them go extinct.