CTH Public Relations

• Global Warming Watch by TonyBlair [October 09, 2011, 06:41:37 PM]
• Solar Panel Doubts by TonyBlair [September 02, 2011, 08:25:23 AM]
• China by CO2HOG [August 23, 2011, 12:41:08 AM]
• Barack Hussein Obama, Emp... by TonyBlair [August 10, 2011, 08:57:54 PM]
• National Debt Clocks and ... by Counter [August 08, 2011, 10:30:42 AM]
• Scanner or Pat Down? by Vocal Observer [June 28, 2011, 01:09:51 PM]
• Rise of the Police State by Vocal Observer [June 28, 2011, 01:01:03 PM]
• Who can we trust? by Vocal Observer [June 08, 2011, 01:07:59 PM]
• Torture by Vocal Observer [June 08, 2011, 12:40:39 PM]
• Anthony Wiener's wiener i... by CarolinaBuckeye [June 01, 2011, 11:29:22 PM]
• Democrat's Culture of Cor... by TonyBlair [May 18, 2011, 06:55:46 AM]
• Hey Obama..You want Taxes... by Vince the Fox [April 21, 2011, 03:12:25 AM]
• Obama Policy Watch by TonyBlair [April 20, 2011, 06:56:14 AM]
• George W. Obama by TonyBlair [April 19, 2011, 06:11:57 AM]
• The Religion of Peace Upd... by TonyBlair [April 12, 2011, 06:43:20 AM]

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

Members

• Total Members: 329
• Latest: boborians

Stats

• Total Posts: 40600
• Total Topics: 5158
• Online Today: 31
• Online Ever: 252
• (April 10, 2011, 07:49:21 AM)

Users Online

Users: 0
Guests: 30
Total: 30

EducateWorthington.org

The 912 Project - Glenn Beck

912 Group of Central Ohio

Please let me know if you'd like your link added

[We could say [Democrats] spend money like drunken sailors, but that would be unfair to drunken sailors. It would be unfair, because the sailors are spending their own money. --Ronald ReaganAl Gore didn't invent the internet, he invented global warmingThe welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants - CamusThe person who advocates government planning of the economy always assumes that it is his plan that will be put into effect. --Hayek]

The Met Office can't predict tomorrow's weather but it CAN predict climate 100 years out..


The BBC may drop the Met Office for forecasts

From the London Times, signs that the Met Office might need a refresher course in basic forecasting skills and bonuses revoked. While I’m often critical of NOAA’s climate issues, the forecasts from NOAA put The Met Office to shame in terms of accuracy and detail. And, NOAA staffers don’t get bonuses, period.

Excerpts from the Times article by Steven Swinford

BUFFETED by complaints about its inaccurate weather forecasts, the Met Office now faces being dumped by the BBC after almost 90 years.

The Met Office contract with the BBC expires in April and the broadcaster has begun talks with Metra, the national forecaster for New Zealand, as a possible alternative.

The BBC put the contract out to tender to ensure “best value for money”, but its timing coincides with a storm over the Met Office’s accuracy.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/16/the-bbc-may-drop-met-office-for-forecasts/

[World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown]

This article does a dissection of how (mis)information becomes integrated in the public consciousness via the IPCC.

World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6991177.ece?print=yes

A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.

Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.

[...] Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was "speculation" and was not supported by any formal research. If confirmed it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research. The IPCC was set up precisely to ensure that world leaders had the best possible scientific advice on climate change.

[...] Some scientists have questioned how the IPCC could have allowed such a mistake into print. Perhaps the most likely reason was lack of expertise. Lal himself admits he knows little about glaciers.

[...] Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman, has previously dismissed criticism of the Himalayas claim as "voodoo science".

[...] "It is ultimately a trail that leads back to a magazine article and that is not the sort of thing you want to end up in an IPCC report."

I guess the voodoo science was right after all, eh Raj?

World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown?

It would have been more honest (I think) if you had questioned the headline as well as the 2nd paragraph

paragraph 2: "Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035."

The claim about the Himalyayan glaciers was not a central claim of the IPCC report. It doesn't even appear in the main body of the report.  If this claim doesn't even appear anywhere in the main report how could it be a central claim of the IPCC Report?

Please explain.


The claim actually appears buried deep in the a separate volume in the Working Group II section which focuses on regional Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. It is not part of Section I that deals with the science.

The World was misled?

Granted, maybe a few people read section II. Do you have any evidence that any news organization has cited this claim resulting in more than just a few people being misled?

World Misled about the reliability of U.S. Surface Termperature
Based on Poorly Sited Weather Stations

Critical attention has been (properly and correctly) focused on poorly sited U.S. weather stations.

TonyBlair has posted on the subject:
Reply 3219 on: November 26, 2009, 08:18:45 AM »




Now we can rest fairly confident that the data from these poorly situated sites actually (until further serious study suggests otherwise) do not bias the full dataset towards warming.

Photos are visually compelling. But only through the careful analysis of the data can we actually determine how these poorly situated sites effect the data.

A study just published in the Journal of Geophysical Research - Atmospheres shows that the poorly sited data is virtually identical to the data from the good sites.
Source: http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ushcn/v2/monthly/menne-etal2010.pdf



For good summary of the full story see http://www.skepticalscience.com/On-the-reliability-of-the-US-Surface-Temperature-Record.html

[We could say [Democrats] spend money like drunken sailors, but that would be unfair to drunken sailors. It would be unfair, because the sailors are spending their own money. --Ronald ReaganAl Gore didn't invent the internet, he invented global warmingThe welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants - CamusThe person who advocates government planning of the economy always assumes that it is his plan that will be put into effect. --Hayek]

To get a glimpse of how petty, slimy, and unprofessional these climate phrenologists are, take a gander of Steve McIntyre's timeline concerning the NASA Y2K mistake in "correcting" temperature data.

NASA: “Hide this after Jim checks it”

The word “hide” has obviously attracted a lot of attention lately – “hide the decline” even occasioning its own song.

Today I’d like to discuss the following remarkable instructions by a NASA employee in the recently disclosed NASA emails (available at Judicial Watch):

    Robert, please move to the CU site and hide this after Jim checks it.
    Darnell, please send it out to Jim’s email list. Jim said if I don’t want to, you should do…

What is that they are planning to “hide”? And why would they be “hiding” it in the first place? And why would Hansen think that one of his employees wouldn’t “want” to send something out to Jim’s email list?

In order to forestall claims that I’ve shown these words “out of context”, I’ve done a careful review of the events leading up to this email.

http://climateaudit.org/2010/01/23/nasa-hide-this-after-jim-checks-it/

and take a look at what started it all:





http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/23/quote-f-the-week-27/#more-15561

[We could say [Democrats] spend money like drunken sailors, but that would be unfair to drunken sailors. It would be unfair, because the sailors are spending their own money. --Ronald ReaganAl Gore didn't invent the internet, he invented global warmingThe welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants - CamusThe person who advocates government planning of the economy always assumes that it is his plan that will be put into effect. --Hayek]

And now there's  "Glaciergate."


Pachauri: the real story behind the Glaciergate scandal

Dr Pachauri has rapidly distanced himself from the IPCC's baseless claim about vanishing glaciers. But the scientist who made the claim now works for Pachauri, writes Christopher Booker

By Christopher Booker

I can report a further dramatic twist to what has inevitably been dubbed "Glaciergate" – the international row surrounding the revelation that the latest report on global warming by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) contained a wildly alarmist, unfounded claim about the melting of Himalayan glaciers. Last week, the IPCC, led by its increasingly controversial chairman, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, was forced to issue an unprecedented admission: the statement in its 2007 report that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035 had no scientific basis, and its inclusion in the report reflected a "poor application" of IPCC procedures.

What has now come to light, however, is that the scientist from whom this claim originated, Dr Syed Hasnain, has for the past two years been working as a senior employee of The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), the Delhi-based company of which Dr Pachauri is director-general. Furthermore, the claim – now disowned by Dr Pachauri as chairman of the IPCC – has helped TERI to win a substantial share of a $500,000 grant from one of America's leading charities, along with a share in a three million euro research study funded by the EU.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7062667/Pachauri-the-real-story-behind-the-Glaciergate-scandal.html

"Glaciergate."


The Denier's Motto: Exaggerate  Everything

[We could say [Democrats] spend money like drunken sailors, but that would be unfair to drunken sailors. It would be unfair, because the sailors are spending their own money. --Ronald ReaganAl Gore didn't invent the internet, he invented global warmingThe welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants - CamusThe person who advocates government planning of the economy always assumes that it is his plan that will be put into effect. --Hayek]

I logged in as a guest (thus defeating the "ignore" function) and came across this great post:

"Glaciergate."

The Denier's Motto: Exaggerate  Everything

How wonderfully funny and idiotic all rolled into one!  AGW cultists proclaim 100 ft sea level rises, increasing hurricane strength and intensity, let's put deniers in jail, let's remove the credentials of weather forecasters who don't toe the line (I could go on and on and on), and now skeptics are the "exaggerators."

Thanks for the laugh of the day!

Now back to the ignore function..

[is]

Now remember, you blithering idiots..for the last time, weather is climate.  At least according to the IPCC.  Oh wait! Did they retract that one too?  I am so confused!


For the IPCC AR4, “weather events are climate” – looks like another retraction is needed

We’ve been admonished by others in the blogosphere when we report on record cold weather or record snow stories of interest by hurling the maxim: “weather is not climate“. Yet when the IPCC does that, linking specific weather events in the IPCC AR4 report, such as a single heatwave, the same people have no complaints. As Davis Rose on the Times reports, the IPCC, under Pachauri’s leadership, botched that too. Now it looks like the IPCC will have to withdraw yet another part of the report.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/24/for-the-ipcc-ar4-weather-events-are-climate-looks-like-another-retraction-is-needed/

Strawman Argument



Rather than address the issue of global warming and the science supporting it you attack a strawman. First you misrepresent your opponent's position. Then you attack that misrepresentation. Rather sad.

"AGW cultists proclaim 100 ft sea level rises" --

Could you cite a journal article?  Who are these AGW cultists? Are they anyone that we should take seriously? Are any of them involved in scientific research? Do any of them publish in any well-respected science journals?

Here's an interesting article:
Science 24 March 2006:
Vol. 311. no. 5768, pp. 1751 - 1753

Simulating Arctic Climate Warmth and Icefield Retreat in the Last Interglaciation
Bette L. Otto-Bliesner,1* Shawn J. Marshall,2 Jonathan T. Overpeck,3 Gifford H. Miller,4 Aixue Hu,1 CAPE Last Interglacial Project members

In the future, Arctic warming and the melting of polar glaciers will be considerable, but the magnitude of both is uncertain. We used a global climate model, a dynamic ice sheet model, and paleoclimatic data to evaluate Northern Hemisphere high-latitude warming and its impact on Arctic icefields during the Last Interglaciation. Our simulated climate matches paleoclimatic observations of past warming, and the combination of physically based climate and ice-sheet modeling with ice-core constraints indicate that the Greenland Ice Sheet and other circum-Arctic ice fields likely contributed 2.2 to 3.4 meters of sea-level rise during the Last
Interglaciation.

2.2 to 3.4 meters isn't anywhere close to 100 feet. Where did you get your exaggerated claim?

The latest research indicates a sea-level rise of about one meter -- that's just a little over 3 feet by the year 2100.

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions, Copenhagen 10.-12. March
2009. All sessions. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Series. Available online at:
http://www.iop.org/EJ/volume/1755-1315/6

TonyBlair

I suggest you be careful with the ignore button.

You might accidentally remove a journal on science from the ignore function.

You certainly wouldn't want to come face to face with a journal article

[We could say [Democrats] spend money like drunken sailors, but that would be unfair to drunken sailors. It would be unfair, because the sailors are spending their own money. --Ronald ReaganAl Gore didn't invent the internet, he invented global warmingThe welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants - CamusThe person who advocates government planning of the economy always assumes that it is his plan that will be put into effect. --Hayek]

Boy, it must be bad when "Britain's longest-serving environmental correspondent" (i.e. kool-aid drinking stenographer) calls for Pachauri's resignation.


Pachauri must resign at once as head of official climate science panel

It is time for the embattled Rajendra Pachauri to resign as Chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC), He is steadfastly refusing to go, but his position is becoming more and more untenable by the day, and the official climate science body will continue to leach credibility while he remains in charge.

When on Friday I wrote for my Daily Telegraph column (published yesterday) that he was “at best one more blunder away from having to resign”, I did not expect other errors to come to light quite so fast. But, as I blogged yesterday, four more have now been reported from the part of the latest IPCC report on Himalayan glaciers that contained the notorious – and now withdrawn - claim that they would disappear by 2035. And there are now reports that it erred in relying on an unpublished report in linking natural disasters like flood and hurricanes to global warming.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geoffreylean/100023489/pachauri-must-quit-as-head-of-official-science-panel/

2009 2nd hottest year on record based on Nasa GISS data
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

Actually 2009 is in a statistical tie with 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007

[We could say [Democrats] spend money like drunken sailors, but that would be unfair to drunken sailors. It would be unfair, because the sailors are spending their own money. --Ronald ReaganAl Gore didn't invent the internet, he invented global warmingThe welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants - CamusThe person who advocates government planning of the economy always assumes that it is his plan that will be put into effect. --Hayek]

"He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future."   --  George Orwell

My, my!!  The Ministries of Truth have been busy with the re-writes!

The purge continues
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/24/the-purge-continues/#more-15627

[We could say [Democrats] spend money like drunken sailors, but that would be unfair to drunken sailors. It would be unfair, because the sailors are spending their own money. --Ronald ReaganAl Gore didn't invent the internet, he invented global warmingThe welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants - CamusThe person who advocates government planning of the economy always assumes that it is his plan that will be put into effect. --Hayek]

Well, well, well!  It's seems that the scrutiny over GLACIERGATE, has led to a flood of other gates.  Or as WUWT calls it; Gate-Du Jour.  Today it's Amazon (Rain Forest) Gate!

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/25/de-jour-gate-flavor-amazon/

And, for your reading (dis)pleasure:
After Climategate, Pachaurigate and Glaciergate: Amazongate
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100023598/after-climategate-pachaurigate-and-glaciergate-amazongate/

The scandal deepens – IPCC AR4 riddled with non peer reviewed WWF papers
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/24/the-scandal-deepens-ipcc-ar4-riddled-with-non-peer-reviewed-wwf-papers/

The IPCC: More Sins of Omission – Telling the Truth but Not the Whole Truth
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/25/the-ipcc-more-sins-of-omission-%e2%80%93-telling-the-truth-but-not-the-whole-truth/

The WWF and the EPA Endangerment Finding
http://climateaudit.org/2010/01/25/the-wwf-and-the-epa-endangerment-finding/