22 July, 2008
The date of the defeat was June 6, 2008.
This assessment is today:
“While the defeat of the Lieberman-Warner bill was not unexpected, the margin of defeat was larger than expected,” said Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis. “The margin of defeat shows global warming alarmists have actually lost ground since the Senate last addressed the issue.”
National Center for Policy Analysis
Daily Policy Digest, July 22, 2008
“…And why the sea is boiling hot–
And whether pigs have wings.”
The Walrus and The Carpenter, Lewis Carroll
(from Through the Looking-Glass and What Alice Found There, 1872)
A dash of lime — a new twist that may cut CO2 levels back to pre-industrial levels
General Science / Chemistry
“Scientists say they have found a workable way of reducing CO2 levels in the atmosphere by adding lime to seawater.”
But Watts Up With That? adds a little pespective:
Nutty Story of the Day #2: whitewashing the ocean
Anthony Watts: “How much lime does it take to treat the whole ocean? Where have we heard this before? Oh yes, dump powdered iron into the ocean…” and reports on:
Tim Kruger, a management consultant at London firm Corven, says:
‘This process has the potential to reverse the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere. It would be possible to reduce CO2 to pre-industrial levels,’ Kruger says.
And Professor Klaus Lackner, a researcher in the field from Columbia University, says: ‘The theoretical CO2 balance is roughly right…it is certainly worth thinking through carefully.’
Lewis Carroll was way, way ahead of his time; or simply read the human condition with uncanny accuracy… Sad, really.
21 July, 2008
Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt
“The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul Ifft, at Bergen, Norway.
“Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.
“Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.”
The Washington Post, 2 November, 1922
And I was all set to panic…
(Original story sourced by Watts Up With That?)
Follow the guys who follow the (surely not?) lies of the mad puppeteers pulling our strings in “The Sky Is Falling” musical (chairs) World Circus Circuit:
“I believe the recent warming is comparable or less than the warming in the 1930s and is now over.
“Recall the CO2 was negatively correlated for almost 4 decades from the 1940s through the 1970s. It was positively correlated from 1900 to 1930s and again 1979 to 1998. This on-again, off-again relationship suggests CO2 is not driving the climate bus but maybe a passenger in the back.
Recent Cooling and the Serious Data Integrity Issue
By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM, AMS Fellow
via ICECAP (datelined July 20, 2008)
20 July, 2008
A rather damaging, and certainly sobering, commentary on “peer review” in this prestigious medical journal which should be noted by all in the scientific community arguing the toss on the changing climate of Earth:
PEER REVIEW: MORE EVIDENCE OF HARM THAN BENEFIT
Peer review—i.e. asking peers of the authors of scientific studies to review the studies critically before publication—is the process that is supposed to ensure the scientific quality of journals. It is a sacred process—and the phrase `peer reviewed journal’ is supposed to guarantee quality. But clearly peer review is deficient. Despite being central to the scientific process it was itself largely unstudied until various pioneers—including Stephen Lock, former editor of the BMJ, and Drummond Rennie, deputy editor of JAMA—urged that it could and should be studied. Studies so far have shown that it is slow, expensive, ineffective, something of a lottery, prone to bias and abuse, and hopeless at spotting errors and fraud. The benefits of peer review have been much harder to establish. As Rennie says, `If it was a drug it would never get onto the market’. Nevertheless, no journal would dare to abandon peer review. Editors are convinced—even though they are finding it had to prove—that peer review is invaluable.
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
Series: The trouble with medical journals
Acknowledgements to Mike Walsh on Watts Up With That?
In a call to balance, this:
Leon Brozyna following on from a comment by Manfred in Watts Up With That? 19 July, 2008.
The following is an email I’ve just sent as suggested. I’ve sought to keep the text neutral so as to keep the focus on support for a continuation of this debate.
I applaud the bold initiative of Jeffrey Marque, one of the editors of the newsletter of the Forum of Physics and Society, for opening the pages of the newsletter to an open public debate on the scientific merits of different views on anthropogenic global warming (AGW).
At a time when science is being dangerously corrupted by dogmatic politicization in which differing views of AGW are viciously attacked through appeals to authority and ad hominem attacks, this move represents the truest spirit of scientific inquiry. In placing this discussion in the pages of the newsletter, the public, both scientist and layman, can see the purest expression of peer review over the coming issues as opposing views on the significance of man’s influence on the changing climate are presented and reviewed on their scientific merits.
19 July, 2008
This is you an’ me, baby…
“For at least some of them, the economic pain felt by consumers is good if it gets them out of their cars, onto buses and trains, out of the suburbs and back into crowded central cities, leaving only the rich able to live an expansive life close to nature.”
Investor’s Business Daily. 17 July, 2008
A clarion call to all mankind; a stark warning; a challenge to our integrity.
“…if allowed to continue to subjugate truth and propogate the false premise that CO2 is a pollutant and harmful, will devour nations, enslave individuals and is in any case futile in the face of a blossoming Asia.”
It is time to stand up and be counted.
Poster My Karma ran over your Dogma wrote this in Watts Up With That? on July 18, 2008
All science loses when one doctrine gains a majority of funding. Any scientist in any other field needs to voice their concerns NOW. Every member of a concerned public who prefers truth over scary fiction must ask for debate.
AGW, and the policies proposed in its defence, if allowed to continue to subjugate truth and propogate the false premise that CO2 is a pollutant and harmful, will devour nations, enslave individuals and is in any case futile in the face of a blossoming Asia.
The perpetrators of this fakery and its attendant baggage will slide off with their ill gotten gains whilst the majority, including academics, politicians and future generations will pay dearly.
This fundamentalist control exercise will set back the advancement of mankind, through burden of taxation if nothing else, by a hundred years – the very same one hundred years we have “in hand” where we can rely on our adequate supplies of oil, gas and coal to propel us toward a clean future power supply technology that works while it protects us from the ravages of the coming cold.
Free fertilizer for all is a benign byproduct of our present dependence on the cleanest energy sources we have so far utilized – we would be in serious respiratory trouble if we still relied on wood, or dung, to fuel our modern economies. CO2 rising to 800ppmv, whilst unlikely due to the coming cold period, would only be a boon to the biosphere just as it is in a real greenhouse.
NOW is the time to make your voices heard:
We, the people, demand that science must triumph over fantasy.
As western nations step up pressure on India and China to curb the emission of greenhouse gases, Russian scientists reject the very idea that carbon dioxide may be responsible for global warming.
“The Kyoto theorists have put the cart before the horse,” says renowned Russian geographer Andrei Kapitsa. “It is global warming that triggers higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, not the other way round.”
Where does this graph come from?
18 July, 2008
No smoking hot spot
David Evans | July 18, 2008
“… We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet.
“But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming…
“If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. So we know for sure that carbon emissions are not a significant cause of the global warming. If we had found the greenhouse signature then I would be an alarmist again.”
As Lord Keynes famously said, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”
A nice balance of knowledge midst frustration:
SO THAT THOSE WHO DARE TO CHANGE THE WORLD ARE ACCOUNTABLE…
(From a poster on the Andrew Bolt column “Seven graphs to end the warming hype.”)
..dear puck..lets muck with puck
maybe you work at a different level to me and others of similar ilk on this blog… my primary beef ..as it were ..being an atmospheric scientist of 35 years dealing with the atmosphere loooong before it became the battle ground it is today..
my primary concern is the science/the scientific data has been misused/massaged to propose a NEW scientific thesis that man-made existance and enhanced c02 amounts have and will cause a runaway warming with serious effects downstream in time..
secondly….as a meteorologists of 35 years of dealing with early primitive atmospheric modelling to the latest multi-dimensional Ensemble modelling allows me to say..
the IPCC MODELLING IS ESSENTIALLY GARBAGE in-garbage out
1) no account for feebacks mechanisms that could stop runaway warming
2) failure to assign a Global Warming Potential to water vapour-the most powerfull of all atmospheric heat valves
3) failure to ..etc ..get the drift
4) there is no science -no scientific peer revieved paper that says reduce co2 by x amount and you get y amount reduction in global temperature
(…a point where recently both wong/rudd stumbled when asked to quantify the alleged reduction impact on temperature and by how much)
So my primary concern is that the contemporary data invalidates the IPCC THESIS-CLEARLY that real time history shows us “temperature PROCEEDED CO2 change by some 800 years ..note puck-not preceeded…
So in short science fiction should not rule the world i exist as shown by the false premise that ETS trading will CONTROL the weather…
puck ,stuff precaution when THOSE IN POWER CHOOSE TO WILLFULLY AND KNOWINGLY FOLLOW A path of self economic mutilation based on bad science
finally – in the scheme of things i am unimportant as I AM NOT IN POWER-OK but thru this blog as with AB and others we seek a deeper understanding SO THAT THOSE WHO DARE TO CHANGE THE WORLD ARE ACCOUNTABLE
… and let the people of oz find the truth for themselves and not be simply a doormat for those on high who wish to stand upon them
AND SAY “TRUST ME”
THIS PAIN IS GOOD FOR YOU…
NOT GOOD ENOUGH … PUCK
isobar of croydonville
Fri 18 Jul 08 (12:59pm)
Andrew Bolt forum
Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate
by Michael Asher, Daily Tech, Jul 17, 2008
The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science. The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming “incontrovertible.”
Major paper shows CO2’s effect on temperature was overstated 500-2000%
“The value of this paper lies in its dispassionate but ruthlessly clear exposition – or, rather, exposé – of the IPCC’s method of evaluating climate sensitivity. The detailed arguments in this paper, and, indeed, in a large number of other scientific papers, point up extensive errors, including numerous projection errors of climate models, as well as misleading statements by the IPCC. Consequently, there are no rational grounds for believing either the IPCC or any other claims of dangerous anthropogenic global warming.” – Comment on paper by Viscount Monckton.
17 July, 2008
DON’T BELIEVE A WORD OF IT.
Strong words from a strong source not to be ignored.
Take this extract alone:
“Time has come for a major independent investigation of the data sets, compilation methodology and adjustment practices (and records) for the global data sets of NOAA, NASA and Hadley. Steve McIntyre and Anthony Watts are doing their best finding problems but Steve has run into many roadblocks suggesting folks have something to hide. Meanwhile we will trust only the UAH and RSS.”
Latest NOAA Press Release in Total Disagreement with NASA Satellite
By Joseph S. D’Aleo, CCM, Fellow of the AMS
ICECAP, July 16, 2008
Wrest their influence from them…
Vested interests are warping science, and warping our lives.
Bald-faced lies are being projected into the consciousness of the western word with the full power of some massive conglomerate of evil intent for… what purpose? Egomaniacal satisfaction? Punishment as some kind of payback to life’s losers? The bitter claiming some semblance of satisfaction for their personal pain?
There would be enlightenment in learning the stories of their childhood. Just what went so wrong then that they must dedicate their adult lives to making all others suffer for their both real and imagined pain.
Wrest their influence from them. Wish them no harm; but remove them from influence and let mankind surge on in glorious adventure.
15 July, 2008
“Earth’s polar temperature has swung wildly—by as much as 15 degrees Celsius (27 degrees Fahrenheit)—over the last 800,000 years, an Antarctic ice core has revealed.
“Meanwhile, the warmest period was during the last interglacial period, which is an interval of warmer global average temperature that separates ice ages. At that time, around 130,000 years ago, it was a balmy 4.5 degrees Celsius (8.1 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than today.”
New Ice Core Reveals 800,000 Years of Climate History
Kate Ravilious, for National Geographic News, July 5, 2007
15 July, 2008
The Lies that Keep On Killing
If you think the vilest evil possible comes with a pitch fork, and horns, breathing fire, sneering and hurling curses, and wearing red, you are wrong. The most despicable evil in the world comes with a smile, a declaration of its concern for the future of mankind, and a promise to save the world—wearing green.
July 14, 2008
15 July, 2008
“Australian history …does not read like history, but like the most beautiful lies; and all of a fresh new sort, no mouldy old stale ones…”
Mark Twain from More Tramps Abroad (1897)
Excuse me, sir; could we borrow those words and begin: “AGW history…?
The basis of most of the IPCC conclusions on anthropogenic causes and on projections of climatic change is the assumption of low level of CO2 in the pre-industrial atmosphere. This assumption, based on glaciological studies, is false. Therefore IPCC projections should not be used for national and global economic planning.
Climate Change: Incorrect information on pre-industrial CO2
Statement of Prof. Zbigniew Jaworowski, Chairman, Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland (March 19, 2004)