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: 30
• Online Ever: 252
• (April 10, 2011, 07:49:21 AM)

Users Online

Users: 0
Guests: 31
Total: 31

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]

There goes those exaggerating deniers again..oh wait, it was the phrenologists..

Latest IPCC Exaggeration
Feb 3, 2010 – 11:26 AM

IPCC AR4 reported:

   " The Netherlands is an example of a country highly susceptible to both sea-level rise and river flooding because 55% of its territory is below sea level where 60% of its population lives and 65% of its Gross National Product (GNP) is produced."

Dutch newspaper Vrij Nederland reported today (Google translation):

    "In its last Assessment Report on the impacts of climate change shows that 55% of Netherlands is below sea level in this area and that 65% of the gross national product is produced. These figures are far too high. The Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) is only one fifth of the Netherlands below sea level and there are only 19% instead of 65% of the GDP generated."

Not that 20% is something to be ignored if that’s what they think. But the percentage below sea level is the sort of thing that primary school geography classes should be able to get right.

http://climateaudit.org/2010/02/03/latest-ipcc-exaggeration/

[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]

If global warming causes freak snowstorms that shut down Washington DC,
I say LET'S START PUMPING OUT TWICE AS MUCH CARBON DIOXIDE!

[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]

What?  No supporting data?  This "peer-review" process is really useful isn't it?  About as useful as Shadow and Idiological Skeptic put together.

I give you the latest 'gate:' Africagate.

The Times: Top British scientist says IPCC is losing credibility
Scientist says IPCC claims about African rainfall reductions due to global warming have no supporting data.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/06/the-times-top-british-scientist-says-ipcc-is-losing-credibility/

IPCC’s “Africagate” blunder as told by Dr. Richard North
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/06/ipccs-latest-blunder-africagate-as-told-by-dr-richard-north/

[There is no scientific merit to be found in the Executive Summary. The presentation sounds like something put together by Greenpeace activists and their legal department. The points being made are made arbitrarily with legal sounding caveats without having established any foundation or basis in fact. The Executive Summary seems to be a political statement that is only designed to annoy greenhouse skeptics. Wasn’t the IPCC Assessment Report intended to be a scientific document that would merit solid backing from the climate science community – instead of forcing many climate scientists into having to agree with greenhouse skeptic criticisms that this is indeed a report with a clear and obvious political agenda. Attribution can not happen until understanding has been clearly demonstrated. Once the facts of climate change have been established and understood, attribution will become self-evident to all. The Executive Summary as it stands is beyond redemption and should simply be deleted.]

Climategate summarized in one nice, neat paragraph..by a climate scientist:

Hansen colleague rejected IPCC AR4 ES as having “no scientific merit”, but what does IPCC do?

The ever sharp Bishop Hill blog writes:

Dr. Andrew A. Lacis - NASA GISS

While perusing some of the review comments to the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report, I came across the contributions of Andrew Lacis, a colleague of James Hansen’s at GISS. Lacis’s is not a name I’ve come across before but some of what he has to say about Chapter 9 of the IPCC’s report is simply breathtaking.

Chapter 9 is possibly the most important one in the whole IPCC report – it’s the one where they decide that global warming is manmade. This is the one where the headlines are made.

Remember, this guy is mainstream, not a sceptic, and you may need to remind yourself of that fact several times as you read through his comment on the executive summary of the chapter:

    There is no scientific merit to be found in the Executive Summary. The presentation sounds like something put together by Greenpeace activists and their legal department. The points being made are made arbitrarily with legal sounding caveats without having established any foundation or basis in fact. The Executive Summary seems to be a political statement that is only designed to annoy greenhouse skeptics. Wasn’t the IPCC Assessment Report intended to be a scientific document that would merit solid backing from the climate science community – instead of forcing many climate scientists into having to agree with greenhouse skeptic criticisms that this is indeed a report with a clear and obvious political agenda. Attribution can not happen until understanding has been clearly demonstrated. Once the facts of climate change have been established and understood, attribution will become self-evident to all. The Executive Summary as it stands is beyond redemption and should simply be deleted.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/09/hansen-colleague-rejected-ipcc-ar4-es-as-having-no-scientific-merit-but-what-does-ipcc-do/#more-16256

Simple logic: first draft does not equal final published document.

Andrew Lacis criticized the first draft of the executive  summary of chapter 9 of AR4 WG1

Gabriele Hegerl, one of the lead authors:

"We felt Andrew Lacis' comment reflected that he couldn't clearly see where statements came from, which is why we strengthened the pointers from the technical sections to the executive summary."

Result--

Lacis:

    "The revised chapter was much improved," he said. "That's different than saying everything in there is nailed down, but I think it's a big improvement."

    Overall, he said, "I commend the authors for doing as good a job as they did. That's the way the science process ought to work. You get inputs from everybody, find any bugs, crank through and the science moves forward."

Again Watt the F lies and gets it all wrong.
 

[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]

Can anyone please tell me what is NOT consistent with global warming?  I believe it must be the grand unifying theory that explains all of space and time..


Snow is consistent with global warming, say scientists
Britain may be in the grip of the coldest winter for 30 years and grappling with up to a foot of snow in some places but the extreme weather is entirely consistent with global warming, claim scientists.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/weather/4436934/Snow-is-consistent-with-global-warming-say-scientists.html

IS, you are so married to this idea. Will nothing budge your mind from the place you've wedged it?

[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]

'Gorewellian'..now that's funny.

Audi’s Gorewellian Super Bowl Ad

Jonah Goldberg

The ad is absurd, of course, but not nearly as absurd as Audi thinks.

I watched the Super Bowl in the chilled air of the G.F.I.S.Z. (that’s Goldberg Family Ice Station Zebra). Here in Washington, we haven’t seen this much snow since at least 1922. The blizzard of 2010 took out our electricity for a day. Digging out from “snowmageddon” was nothing less than an Augean challenge, though my lower back is, alas, less than Herculean. Meanwhile, snow canceled my daughter’s seventh birthday party Saturday and her school Monday. We’re slated for another foot by Wednesday.

Suffice it to say I’m not panicking about global warming right now.

Perhaps that’s why I was bemused and intrigued by Audi’s Super Bowl ad.

http://article.nationalreview.com/424456/audis-gorewellian-super-bowl-ad/jonah-goldberg

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/Wq58zS4_jvM&rel=0" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/Wq58zS4_jvM&rel=0</a>

[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]

Who would have guessed this?  Hint: most conservatives.

Stimulating?   [Greg Pollowitz]

ABC News:

    New Wind Farms in the U.S. Do Not Bring Jobs

    Millions Have Been Invested in Wind Farms, but That Hasn't Brought Jobs

    Despite all the talk of green jobs, the overwhelming majority of stimulus money spent on wind power has gone to foreign companies, according to a new report by the Investigative Reporting Workshop at the American University's School of Communication in Washington, D.C.

    Nearly $2 billion in money from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has been spent on wind power, funding the creation of enough new wind farms to power 2.4 million homes over the past year. But the study found that nearly 80 percent of that money has gone to foreign manufacturers of wind turbines.

http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWM2MzJiZDUwNzhmOWZjODgzNDVjYzJmNmU4NTgwY2Y=

[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 Chief Climate Phrenologist changes his tune as the result of Climategate and several government inquiries.  Like a deer caught in the headlights.  Imagine the poor dullards who believed anything he said previously..
I translate the phrenologist code-speak below.


Climate data 'not well organised'
By Roger Harrabin
Environment analyst, BBC News

Phil Jones, the professor behind the "Climategate" affair, has admitted some of his decades-old weather data was not well enough organised.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511701.stm

From the article:

"He has admitted some of his decades-old weather data was not well enough organised."

Translation:  We had no idea what we were doing, but the agenda was clear: scare the hell out of everyone even if the data said the opposite.  This would keep the grant money rolling in for decades to come.  The socialists among us (about 98%), also wanted to use this as a deathblow to corporations and capitalism.

"He said this contributed to his refusal to share raw data with critics - a decision he says he regretted."

Translation: We never thought we would get caught.

"But Professor Jones said he had not cheated over the data, or unfairly influenced the scientific process."

Translation:  We did all of those things, because we thought we would never get caught.

"He said he stood by the view that recent climate warming was most likely predominantly man-made. "

Translation:  We have no evidence, and what evidence we have is badly organized.  This is a cult, we really don't need evidence.

"But he agreed that two periods in recent times had experienced similar warming. And he agreed that the debate had not been settled over whether the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than the current period."

Translation:  Even though we strenuously denied this in the past, and even though we used faked data and graphs to eliminate the Roman and Medieval Warm Periods, we had enormous fun calling people "deniers" and "flat-earthers."  We even got a Nobel Prize for it.  How many Nobel Prizes do you have?

"Professor Jones agreed that scientists on both sides of the debate could suffer sometimes from a "bunker mentality".  He said "sceptics" who doubted his climate record should compile their own dataset from material publicly available in the US."

Translation:  We invented the bunker mentality because we wouldn't allow skeptics access to any data.  Skeptics couldn't compile their own dataset because we controlled everything up until Climategate.

""We do have a trail of where the (weather) stations have come from but it's probably not as good as it should be," he admitted."

Translation:  The data is faulty.  But we used to our advantage anyway.

"They also needed to be more transparent with data..."

Translation:  We are just as transparent as our Dear Leader, The Won, the Teleprompter in Chief, President 0bama.

[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]

Wow!  It just keeps rolling in.. Can you imagine this being said if there was no Climategate scandal?  And no warming since 1995?  And there was some moron on this website who claimed the skeptics were the exaggerators.  Wouldn't it be great if the ignorant liberals would actually learn something from this and just shut up for a generation or two?  (Yes, I am dreaming..since liberals have no soul or shame..they will continue on as if nothing ever happened.)

I am really starting to enjoy this..


Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

By Jonathan Petre

    * Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing
    * There has been no global warming since 1995
    * Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes

The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.

Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.

Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.

The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely man-made.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html#ixzz0fVyM3q4Y

"And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming."

Look TonyBlair, you can't have it both ways.

If you want to claim that there is a distinction between trends that are statistically significant and trends that aren't statistically significant then you must accept the distinction between climate and weather.

Climate is a long term trend that displays a difference between variations and a signal of a trend -- the signal stands out from the noise.
Weather is short term noise hiding the signal of a trend.

Generally you deny this distinction. Now you embrace it.

Now you want to make this distinction when it suits you.

There is nothing statistically significant about short time spans including a 15 year trend. This is weather.

The last 30 years do show a statistically significant upward trend:

[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]

They can't read or write (Detroit Public hasn't had a new text book in 20 years), yet they CAN drink the green kool-aid:

Green Student Indoctrination   [Henry Payne]

Detroit — Michigan eighth-graders are 36th in the nation in math and 33rd in reading. But legislators are making sure they excel at what matters — like greening school buses by checking their tire pressures.

In 2006, Michigan created a bipartisan “Green School” law that tasked government to recognize schools with green programs. To qualify, an institution must task its students to complete half of a list of 20 green options, including:

http://planetgore.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWU3ZTU5NzQ4ZjQ1NWZjM2RhMGM5MTk0MGU1NTZmZTA=

[“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC.]

Oh..and look!  Another one?  He must have looked at Watt's surfacestations.org.  True science is a wonderful thing..

World may not be warming, say scientists
Jonathan Leake

The United Nations climate panel faces a new challenge with scientists casting doubt on its claim that global temperatures are rising inexorably because of human pollution.

In its last assessment the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the evidence that the world was warming was “unequivocal”.

It warned that greenhouse gases had already heated the world by 0.7C and that there could be 5C-6C more warming by 2100, with devastating impacts on humanity and wildlife. However, new research, including work by British scientists, is casting doubt on such claims. Some even suggest the world may not be warming much at all.

“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC.

The doubts of Christy and a number of other researchers focus on the thousands of weather stations around the world, which have been used to collect temperature data over the past 150 years.

These stations, they believe, have been seriously compromised by factors such as urbanisation, changes in land use and, in many cases, being moved from site to site.

Christy has published research papers looking at these effects in three different regions: east Africa, and the American states of California and Alabama.

“The story is the same for each one,” he said. “The popular data sets show a lot of warming but the apparent temperature rise was actually caused by local factors affecting the weather stations, such as land development.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7026317.ece