Global Warming Rort Over

[robman]

My, how scientific...

[sickofpollies]

Too bad our glaciers have been shrinking for the last 6500 years.

Scientists have gained new insights to global climate patterns from the advances and retreats of glaciers in the Mount Cook region over the past 7000 years...

Surface rocks are continually bombarded by cosmic rays. Over time, cosmic radiation causes the build-up of certain isotopes in the rock.  By measuring the amounts of beryllium-10 in rocks on the moraines, the scientists have been able to pinpoint dates when glaciers in the Southern Alps started to recede.

They found, to their surprise, that the growth and retreat of New Zealand glaciers differs from those in the Northern Hemisphere. Within the past 7000 years, the Mt Cook glaciers achieved their maximum length 6500 years ago, and have been smaller ever since.

http://www.sciencealert.com.au/news/20090405-19081.html

I wonder if the scaremongers will re-write history to prove that the industrial age started 6500 years ago in New Zealand? I state this because a former xtranewscommunity member, Shortfuse, once posted a Greenpeace temperature chart that stated quite bluntly the industrial period started at the end of the last ice age (where there was a massive and rapid change in climate). I wish I had kept a copy of it. It shows how utterly stupid the Greens are. (I was actually surprised that when I pointed this out to Shortfuse he left the Green party over it.)

[sickofpollies]

The Information Commissioner has said that the University of East Anglia, which is at the centre of the 'climategate' row, broke the law when its scientists refused to hand over raw data requested under the Freedom of Information Act.

...

The Information Commissioner's Office told Channel 4 News that the requests made to Dr Jones's unit for data "were not dealt with as they should have been under the legislation. Section 77 of the Freedom of Information Act makes it an offence for public authorities to act so as to prevent intentionally the disclosure of requested information."

The office said that a case like this would usually be prosecuted through the magistrates courts and could lead to a fine of up to £5,000.

However, the requests for data to UEA were sent in 2007/8. The responses only came to light when a hacker posted emails from the Climatic Research Unit on the web at the end of last year. Prosecutions can only take place within six months of the offence, so the ICO says it cannot act.

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/science_technology/climategate+the+email+trail/3519452

Vindication regarding Climategate has started. As the UK MP Bloom stated: 'Phil Jones, crook...Scam, scam, scam!'

[Magoo]

Some of the flock do not have wool over their eyes.

[guest49]

A warmalist examining increasing arctic sea ice.

[DazzaMc]

As europe and the US experience record cold snaps the appetite for global warming scares has declined
wonder what the new scare story will be

PMSL!!!

Oh shit - you're funny...  and a tad dumb.

So - according to you and based on the observation of a weather event which affected around 2.6% of the planets surface - you are calling climate change a con?

Asides from the fact that the abnormal weather experienced is in perfect alignment with climate change/global warming...

 

[DazzaMc]

Past Decade the Warmest Since 1880

When an unusually cold stretch of weather grips much of the world, as one did in December, it can leave people wondering what ever happened to global warming. The gradual inching up of temperatures popularly known as climate change is alive and well, according to NASA.

The decade 2000 through 2009 was the warmest since reliable modern records have been kept, going back to 1880. There are, of course, monthly and even annual variations that buck the trend.

According to NASA's Earth Observatory, 2008 was the coolest year of the decade, and 2009 saw a return to near-record global temperatures (despite that frigid December, which was unseasonably cool for much of North America, Europe, and Asia).

2009 was only a fraction of a degree cooler than 2005, which is the warmest year on record. Importantly, 2009 tied with a cluster of other years — 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006 and 2007 1998 and 2007 — as the second warmest year since modern recordkeeping began in 1880.

Throughout the last three decades, the GISS surface temperature record shows an upward trend of about 0.2°C (0.36°F) per decade.

Since 1880, when modern scientific instrumentation became available to monitor temperatures precisely, a clear warming trend is present, NASA said in a statement this week. In total, average global temperatures have increased by about 0.8°C (1.5°F) since 1880.

"That's the important number to keep in mind," said Gavin Schmidt, a climatologist at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS). "In contrast, the difference between, say, the second and sixth warmest years is trivial since the known uncertainty — or noise — in the temperature measurement is larger than some of the differences between the warmest years."

"There's always an interest in the annual temperature numbers and on a given year's ranking, but usually that misses the point," said GISS Director James Hansen. "There's substantial year-to-year variability of global temperature caused by the tropical El Niño-La Niña cycle. But when we average temperature over five or ten years to minimize that variability, we find that global warming is continuing unabated."

And what about that chilly December? Climate experts say we can continue to expect stretches that vary considerably from the norm.

In December, high air pressures in the Arctic decreased the east-west flow of the jet stream, while also increasing its tendency to blow from north to south and draw cold air southward from the Arctic. This resulted in an unusual effect that caused frigid air from the Arctic to rush into North America and warmer mid-latitude air to shift toward the north.

"Of course, the contiguous 48 states cover only 1.5 percent of the world area, so the U.S. temperature does not affect the global temperature much," Hansen said.

El Niño can have a great effect on any given month or year. El Nino is marked by warmer water in the Pacific off the coast of South America. It alters weather patterns in the United States and around the world.

An especially powerful El Niño cycle in 1998 is thought to have contributed to the unusually high temperatures that year, and Hansen's group estimates that there's a good chance 2010 will be the warmest year on record if the current El Niño persists. At most, scientists estimate that El Niño and its cool sister La Niña can cause global temperatures to deviate by about 0.2°C (0.36°F).

Warmer surface temperatures also tend to occur during particularly active parts of the solar cycle, known as solar maximums, while slightly cooler temperatures occur during lulls in activity, called minimums.

A deep solar minimum has made sunspots a rarity in the last few years. Such lulls in solar activity, which can cause the total amount of energy given off by the sun to decrease by about a tenth of a percent, typically spur surface temperature to dip slightly. Overall, solar minimums and maximums are thought to produce no more than 0.1°C (0.18°F) of cooling or warming.

"In 2009, it was clear that even the deepest solar minimum in the period of satellite data hasn't stopped global warming from continuing," Hansen said.

http://www.livescience.com/environment/warmest-decade-100123.html

[guest49]

Hello!
The resident warmalist is back!

Welcome back mate......

[sickofpollies]

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/22/flashback-bob-tisdales-november-prediction-on-giss-exploiting-the-warmest-decade-on-record/

I wonder if there are other issues around...

Of course iit's now known that CRU was cherry picking Russian data to demonstrate warming:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100020126/climategate-goes-serial-now-the-russians-confirm-that-uk-climate-scientists-manipulated-data-to-exaggerate-global-warming/

[DazzaMc]

Hello!
The resident warmalist is back!

Welcome back mate......

Cheers matey!
It was a hard thing to do - but we had to come back...
 

[DazzaMc]

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/22/flashback-bob-tisdales-november-prediction-on-giss-exploiting-the-warmest-decade-on-record/

I wonder if there are other issues around...

Of course iit's now known that CRU was cherry picking Russian data to demonstrate warming:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100020126/climategate-goes-serial-now-the-russians-confirm-that-uk-climate-scientists-manipulated-data-to-exaggerate-global-warming/

I see you STILL haven't been paying attention SOP...

 

[sickofpollies]

I've definitely been paying attention. It would appear that the wheels are slowly, but surely, coming off the gravy train.

Pachauri for example was on track to earn billions out of all you chicken littles, but now his former allies are calling for his head (e.g., leading Canadian 'climatologist' Andrew Weaver). It's amazing how much Pachauri has already rorted out of the system. (He's the IPCC chairman in case you didn't know. The guy who employs Dr Hasnain, via TERI, who came up with the 2035 prediction. You know the 2007 IPCC "gold standard" of science of peer review process. The same TERI who has used the 2035 date to extort millions upon millions in grants, but that's chicken feed compared to Pachauri's Tata group which stands to make billions upon billions out of the EU ETS scam.)

Anytime you mention Exxon-Mobil, we can use Pachauri as a counter-example. No doubt more examples of those making squillions out of the gullible and stupid will come out in the next wee while.

Things have changed pace since you were on holiday Daz. The appetite for blaming mankind for "climate change" has dwindled rapidly. Almost daily we're seeing new revelations about the IPCC and related industies' corruptions come out. It's been fascinating thus far.

[robman]

I hope the people driving this gravy train at full speed apply the brakes before it runs out of track...

[robman]

And all you apologists, Dazza, Throatyjackal et al? How does it feel to be the new contrarians?

[sickofpollies]

I hope the people driving this gravy train at full speed apply the brakes before it runs out of track...

Hard to say. I expect the sheeple will be rather angry in the short term. I hope Pachauri remains as chairman of the IPCC. He's really the symbol of what human induced global propaganda is all about: greed.

So far he has refused to resign.

[sickofpollies]

And all you apologists, Dazza, Throatyjackal et al? How does it feel to be the new contrarians?

ROTFLMAO. I wonder what Daz will be saying when the scientific consensus says that human induced climate change was a crock of shit?

[DazzaMc]

And all you apologists, Dazza, Throatyjackal et al? How does it feel to be the new contrarians?

ROTFLMAO. I wonder what Daz will be saying when the scientific consensus says that human induced climate change was a crock of shit?

Easy - I will be totally supporting that fact - if and when it is proven as fact....  which it wont ever be - because it's not and it cant be...

Remember - it's the science which captures me - not the politics or the money or the fear of change...  for those things I just couldn't give a shit.
 

[Magoo]

Off topic........... Gidday Dazza.  Nice to see you back.

[DazzaMc]

Thanks Magoo - we've all had a great time and it was hard to return back here - but here we be.
If you're on Facebook and you know my full name - search for me and make me a friend - then you'll know all about it!

 

[sickofpollies]

Remember - it's the science which captures me - not the politics or the money or the fear of change...  for those things I just couldn't give a shit.
 

But that's where you're wrong. Blaming humans for inducing climate change has always been about the politics and the money. It's never been about the science for them, otherwise Phil Jones, Michael Mann and so forth would have been a lot more forthcoming. Instead they're about massaging data (and deleting losing the original data), and even they cherry pick as has been recently discovered with Russia: when the data doesn't match hypothesis simply eliminate it.

It was interesting to note Phil Jones' excuse on "hiding the decline". Did you know tree ring data was only accurate before 1960? Those same trees didn't show warming from 1961, but then why else use Mann's trick to "hide the decline"?

It will be interesting to see what the investigation on Michael Mann brings in next week. As I said, the gravy train is losing wheels almost daily now.

It's been such an interesting year thus far. Has Dr Lal pointed out putting in such things like the 2035 data wasn't about science, it was about sensationalism. The IPCC 2007 fictional report has already crumpled over Himalayan glaciers and recently about the so-called correlation of increased CO2 causing more disasters (which the scientist behind that has withdrawn his conclusions. Not that these were peer reviewed, but of course politics, not science, were the reasons for their inclusion). I wonder what else will be brought to light about the document in the coming weeks and months. Its already proving to be unreliable and there's talk of the next one having dissenting views in it to try and improve its reputation.

Bloody awesome. What the next cog or wheel coming off the gravy train is anybody's guess (though I'm picking Michael "I'm hopeless with a hockey stick" Mann next week).

So, since climatology as prescribed by the IPCC and followers isn't about science, but money and politics, are you changing your position?

[sickofpollies]

Oopsie daisy. The awesome "gold standard" of politics and money science and peer review, the 2007 IPCC, Nobel Prize Winning, Climate report has all sorts of citations from non-peer reviewed, pressure and political groups. Oh dear. How many wheels does this gravy train have before it completely derails?

GREENPEACE-GENERATED LITERATURE CITED BY THE 2007 NOBEL-WINNING CLIMATE REPORT

    * Aringhoff, R., C. Aubrey, G. Brakmann, and S. Teske, 2003: Solar thermal power 2020, Greenpeace International/European Solar Thermal Power Industry Association, Netherlands
    * ESTIA, 2004: Exploiting the heat from the sun to combat climate change. European Solar Thermal Industry Association and Greenpeace, Solar Thermal Power 2020, UK
    * Greenpeace, 2004: http://www.greenpeace.org.ar/cop10ing/SolarGeneration.pdf accessed 05/06/07
    * Greenpeace, 2006: Solar generation. K. McDonald (ed.), Greenpeace International, Amsterdam
    * GWEC, 2006: Global wind energy outlook. Global Wind Energy Council, Bruxelles and Greenpeace, Amsterdam, September, 56 pp., accessed 05/06/07
    * Hoegh-Guldberg, O., H. Hoegh-Guldberg, H. Cesar and A. Timmerman, 2000: Pacific in peril: biological, economic and social impacts of climate change on Pacific coral reefs. Greenpeace, 72 pp.
    * Lazarus, M., L. Greber, J. Hall, C. Bartels, S. Bernow, E. Hansen, P. Raskin, and D. Von Hippel, 1993: Towards a fossil free energy future: the next energy transition. Stockholm Environment Institute, Boston Center, Boston. Greenpeace International, Amsterdam.
    * Wind Force 12, 2005: Global Wind Energy Council and Greenpeace, http://www.gwec.net/index.php?id=8, accessed 03/07/07

Source

All told, an extensive list of documents created or co-authored by the WWF is cited by this Nobel-winning IPCC report:

    * Allianz and World Wildlife Fund, 2006: Climate change and the financial sector: an agenda for action, 59 pp. [Accessed 03.05.07: http://www.wwf.org.uk/ filelibrary/pdf/allianz_rep_0605.pdf]
    * Austin, G., A. Williams, G. Morris, R. Spalding-Feche, and R. Worthington, 2003: Employment potential of renewable energy in South Africa. Earthlife Africa, Johannesburg and World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Denmark, November, 104 pp.
    * Baker, T., 2005: Vulnerability Assessment of the North-East Atlantic Shelf Marine Ecoregion to Climate Change, Workshop Project Report, WWF, Godalming, Surrey, 79 pp.
    * Coleman, T., O. Hoegh-Guldberg, D. Karoly, I. Lowe, T. McMichael, C.D. Mitchell, G.I. Pearman, P. Scaife and J. Reynolds, 2004: Climate Change: Solutions for Australia. Australian Climate Group, 35 pp. http://www.wwf.org.au/ publications/acg_solutions.pdf
    * Dlugolecki, A. and S. Lafeld, 2005: Climate change - agenda for action: the financial sector’s perspective. Allianz Group and WWF, Munich [may be the same document as "Allianz" above, except that one is dated 2006 and the other 2005]
    * Fritsche, U.R., K. Hünecke, A. Hermann, F. Schulze, and K. Wiegmann, 2006: Sustainability standards for bioenergy. Öko-Institut e.V., Darmstadt, WWF Germany, Frankfurt am Main, November
    * Giannakopoulos, C., M. Bindi, M. Moriondo, P. LeSager and T. Tin, 2005: Climate Change Impacts in the Mediterranean Resulting from a 2oC Global Temperature Rise. WWF report, Gland Switzerland. Accessed 01.10.2006 at http://assets.panda.org/downloads/medreportfinal8july05.pdf.

    * Hansen, L.J., J.L. Biringer and J.R. Hoffmann, 2003: Buying Time: A User’s Manual for Building Resistance and Resilience to Climate Change in Natural Systems. WWF Climate Change Program, Berlin, 246 pp.
    * http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/what_we_do/climate_change/our_solutions/business_industry/climate_savers/ index.cfm
    * Lechtenbohmer, S., V. Grimm, D. Mitze, S. Thomas, M. Wissner, 2005: Target 2020: Policies and measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the EU. WWF European Policy Office, Wuppertal
    * Malcolm, J.R., C. Liu, L. Miller, T. Allnut and L. Hansen, Eds., 2002a: Habitats at Risk: Global Warming and Species Loss in Globally Significant Terrestrial Ecosystems. WWF World Wide Fund for Nature, Gland, 40 pp.
    * Rowell, A. and P.F. Moore, 2000: Global Review of Forest Fires. WWF/IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, 66 pp. http://www.iucn.org/themes/fcp/publications /files/global_review_forest_fires.pdf

    * WWF, 2004: Deforestation threatens the cradle of reef diversity. World Wide Fund for Nature, 2 December 2004. http://www.wwf.org/
    * WWF, 2004: Living Planet Report 2004. WWF- World Wide Fund for Nature (formerly World Wildlife Fund), Gland, Switzerland, 44 pp.
    * WWF (World Wildlife Fund), 2005: An overview of glaciers, glacier retreat, and subsequent impacts in Nepal, India and China. World Wildlife Fund, Nepal Programme, 79 pp.

    * Zarsky, L. and K. Gallagher, 2003: Searching for the Holy Grail? Making FDI Work for Sustainable Development. Analytical Paper, World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Switzerland

I've only spent a few hours tracking these down, so there may be more.

Source

Gosh, just how much science made it into that report instead of politics?

[sickofpollies]

Oh no, NASA's GISS is also guilty of cherry picking data to fit their hypothesis!

Perhaps the key point discovered by Smith was that by 1990, NOAA had deleted from its datasets all but 1,500 of the 6,000 thermometers in service around the globe.
Now, 75% represents quite a drop in sampling population, particularly considering that these stations provide the readings used to compile both the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) and United States Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) datasets. These are the same datasets, incidentally, which serve as primary sources of temperature data not only for climate researchers and universities worldwide, but also for the many international agencies using the data to create analytical temperature anomaly maps and charts.

...

However, Smith points out that a dropped record may be “from a location that has existed for 100 years.” For instance, if an aging piece of equipment gets swapped out, thereby changing its identification number, the time horizon reinitializes to zero years. Even having a large enough temporal gap (e.g., during a world war) might cause the data to “just get tossed out.”
But the real chicanery begins in the next phase, wherein the planet is flattened and stretched onto an 8,000-box grid, into which the time series are converted to a series of anomalies (degree variances from the baseline). Now, you might wonder just how one manages to fill 8,000 boxes using 1,500 stations.
Here’s NASA’s solution:

    For each grid box, the stations within that grid box and also any station within 1200km of the center of that box are combined using the reference station method.

Even on paper, the design flaws inherent in such a process should be glaringly obvious.
So it’s no surprise that Smith found many examples of problems surfacing in actual practice. He offered me Hawaii for starters. It seems that all of the Aloha State’s surviving stations reside in major airports. Nonetheless, this unrepresentative hot data is what’s used to “infill” the surrounding “empty” Grid Boxes up to 1200 km out to sea. So in effect, you have “jet airport tarmacs ‘standing in’ for temperature over water 1200 km closer to the North Pole.”

...

An isolated problem? Hardly, reports Smith.
From KUSI’s Global Warming: The Other Side:

    “There’s a wonderful baseline for Bolivia — a very high mountainous country — right up until 1990 when the data ends.  And if you look on the [GISS] November 2009 anomaly map, you’ll see a very red rosy hot Bolivia [boxed in blue].  But how do you get a hot Bolivia when you haven’t measured the temperature for 20 years?”

Of course, you already know the answer:  GISS simply fills in the missing numbers – originally cool, as Bolivia contains proportionately more land above 10,000 feet than any other country in the world – with hot ones available in neighboring stations on a beach in Peru or somewhere in the Amazon jungle.

Remember that single station north of 65° latitude which they located in a warm section of northern Canada? Joe D’Aleo explained its purpose: “To estimate temperatures in the Northwest Territory [boxed in green above], they either have to rely on that location or look further south.”
Pretty slick, huh?

And those are but a few examples. In fact, throughout the entire grid, cooler station data are dropped and “filled in” by temperatures extrapolated from warmer stations in a manner obviously designed to overestimate warming…
…And convince you that it’s your fault.

Source

[AnFaolchudubh]

Easy - I will be totally supporting that fact - if and when it is proven as fact....  which it wont ever be - because it's not and it cant be...

Never be so arrogant as to say that dazza, many people have said that self same thing about a good many things in the past and have been proved wrong in one way or another; I'm sure you'll have some 'smug dazza's right your all wrong' answer, you are always arrogant enough to have one (comes from being a stereo typical JAFA) but if you get you head out of your science cloud for once and look at the history of real life you'll notice that my comment actually has some merit as I said many people have said something will never be prove a fact and have had to eat humble pie... Whether you comment is true or not Dazza just shows how arrogant you really are, tho that goes without saying, in my experience the import JAFAs turn out to be more stereotypical JAFA the the born and bred ones!

[ballasted moth]

More signs the Copenhagen meeting was a cvrock

The amount of wasted energy it took to run it
Robert Mugabe lectured guests as a main speaker
The result that temperatures can rise 2 degrees  c  before any real action is required

How can anyone still support this circus

[sickofpollies]

How can anyone still support this circus

Howabout Osama Bin Laden? Seems as though eco-terrorists warmalists and ordinary terrorists are joined at the hip...