Posted on 11/28/2009 10:50:23 AM PST by ricks_place
Our hopelessly compromised scientific establishment cannot be allowed to get away with a whitewash regarding statistics for global warming, says Christopher Booker
A week after my colleague James Delingpole, on his Telegraph blog, coined the term "Climategate" to describe the scandal revealed by the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, Google was showing that the word now appears across the internet more than nine million times. But in all these acres of electronic coverage, one hugely relevant point about these thousands of documents has largely been missed.
The reason why even the Guardian's George Monbiot has expressed total shock and dismay at the picture revealed by the documents is that their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated, What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Professor Philip Jones, the CRU's director, is in charge of the two key sets of data used by the IPCC to draw up its reports...
Dr Jones is also a key part of the closely knit group of American and British scientists responsible for promoting that picture of world temperatures conveyed by Michael Mann's "hockey stick" graph which 10 years ago turned climate history on its head...
Given star billing by the IPCC, not least for the way it appeared to eliminate the long-accepted Mediaeval Warm Period when temperatures were higher they are today...
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Your colleague should get 100 lashes with a wet noodle for Egregious Unoriginality.
Howard C. Hayden
785 S. McCoy Drive
Pueblo West, CO 81007
October 27, 2009
The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20460
Dear Administrator Jackson:
I write in regard to the Proposed Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, Proposed Rule, 74 Fed. Reg. 18,886 (Apr. 24, 2009), the so-called “Endangerment Finding.”
It has been often said that the “science is settled” on the issue of CO2 and climate. Let me put this claim to rest with a simple one-letter proof that it is false.
The letter is s, the one that changes model into models. If the science were settled, there would be precisely one model, and it would be in agreement with measurements.
Alternatively, one may ask which one of the twenty-some models settled the science so that all the rest could be discarded along with the research funds that have kept those models alive.
We can take this further. Not a single climate model predicted the current cooling phase. If the science were settled, the model (singular) would have predicted it.
Let me next address the horror story that we are approaching (or have passed) a “tipping point.” Anybody who has worked with amplifiers knows about tipping points. The output “goes to the rail.” Not only that, but it stays there. That’s the official worry coming from the likes of James Hansen (of NASAGISS) and Al Gore.
But therein lies the proof that we are nowhere near a tipping point. The earth, it seems, has seen times when the CO2 concentration was up to 8,000 ppm, and that did not lead to a tipping point. If it did, we would not be here talking about it. In fact, seen on the long scale, the CO2 concentration in the present cycle of glacials (ca. 200 ppm) and interglacials (ca.. 300-400 ppm) is lower than it has been for the last 300 million years.
Global-warming alarmists tell us that the rising CO2 concentration is (A) anthropogenic and (B) leading to global warming.
(A) CO2 concentration has risen and fallen in the past with no help from mankind. The present rise began in the 1700s, long before humans could have made a meaningful contribution. Alarmists have failed to ask, let alone answer, what the CO2 level would be today if we had never burned any fuels. They simply assume that it would be the “pre-industrial” value.
* The solubility of CO2 in water decreases as water warms, and increases as water cools. The warming of the earth since the Little Ice Age has thus caused the oceans to emit CO2 into the atmosphere.
(B) The first principle of causality is that the cause has to come before the effect. The historical record shows that climate changes precede CO2 changes. How, then, can one conclude that CO2 is responsible for the current warming?
Nobody doubts that CO2 has some greenhouse effect, and nobody doubts that CO2 concentration is increasing. But what would we have to fear if CO2 and temperature actually increased?
* A warmer world is a better world. Look at weather-related death rates in winter and in summer, and the case is overwhelming that warmer is better.
* The higher the CO2 levels, the more vibrant is the biosphere, as numerous experiments in greenhouses have shown. But a quick trip to the museum can make that case in spades. Those huge dinosaurs could not exist anywhere on the earth today because the land is not productive enough. CO2 is plant food, pure and simple.
* CO2 is not pollution by any reasonable definition.
* A warmer world begets more precipitation.
* All computer models predict a smaller temperature gradient between the poles and the equator. Necessarily, this would mean fewer and less violent storms.
* The melting point of ice is 0 ºC in Antarctica, just as it is everywhere else. The highest recorded temperature at the South Pole is -14 ºC, and the lowest is -117 ºC. How, pray, will a putative few degrees of warming melt all the ice and inundate Florida, as is claimed by the warming alarmists?
Consider the change in vocabulary that has occurred. The term global warming has given way to the term climate change, because the former is not supported by the data. The latter term, climate change, admits of all kinds of illogical attributions.. If it warms up, that’s climate change. If it cools down, ditto. Any change whatsoever can be said by alarmists to be proof of climate change.
In a way, we have been here before. Lord Kelvin “proved” that the earth could not possibly be as old as the geologists said. He “proved” it using the conservation of energy. What he didn’t know was that nuclear energy, not gravitation, provides the internal heat of the sun and the earth.
Similarly, the global-warming alarmists have “proved” that CO2 causes global warming.
Except when it doesn’t.
To put it fairly but bluntly, the global-warming alarmists have relied on a pathetic version of science in which computer models take precedence over data, and numerical averages of computer outputs are believed to be able to predict the future climate. It would be a travesty if the EPA were to countenance such nonsense.
Best Regards,
Howard C. Hayden
Professor Emeritus of Physics, UConn
Fox News is reporting it.
CNN & The New York Times reported on the ethics of the stolen email, reporting the data wasn't for the public to view.
The other fraud is Jim Hansen at NASA. He has been hiding and manipulating data, hiding his methods - he is no scientist, just a marxist activist. He controls the second dataset, GISS.
It’s the worst POLITICAL scam of our generation.
AWG is driven entirely by criminal design for power and money.
Meanwhile, the Canadian TV broadcasters, who marketed the Kool-aid, have instituted a total blackout on the story.
We're helpless in the face of this wicked persecution.
So Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel, is actually *against* the GW hype? Someone at DSLReports yesterday was saying he is sick of the weather channel hyping up “climate change”. I am wondering if Coleman is out of the picture as far as TWC goes about its business? Retired?
I havent watched it years.
“Meanwhile, the Canadian TV broadcasters, who marketed the Kool-aid, have instituted a total blackout on the story.”
- Not to mention the CRTC trying to block channels from the U.S., as well as mandating week delays for tv shows. Wonder if they will try and block foxnews.
Interesting that the whole environmental movement really took off rather swiftly after communism fell
Canadians Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick are agents for change we can believe in. Thank You Canada!
To read what real scientists have to say, that is, those who are not living off phony grants, and disillusioned left wing head cases
Google “Harvard and MIT debunk global warming”
The whole page is chock full of proof.
The 12 Days Of Global Warming (Youtube)
Here are the lyrics so we can all sing along:
Hide The Decline - Climategate
Makin’ up data the ol’ hard way
Fudgin’ the numbers day by day
ignoring the snow and the cold and a downward line
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
Michael Mann thinks he’s so smart
totally inventing the hockey stick chart
ignoring the snow and the cold and a downward line
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
ClimateGate
I think you have sealed your fate
I hope you do a lot of time
cuz what you did was such a crime
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
the tree ring data was very thin
you shoulda chopped more trees instead of hugging them
ignoring the snow and the cold and a downward line
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
ClimateGate
I think you have sealed your fate
I hope you do a lot of time
cuz what you did was such a crime
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
Hide the decline (Hide the decline)
Source: youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEiLgbBGKVk
Notes from poster on youtube:
Purchase the video here: http://minnesotansforglobalwarming.co...
A parody of “Draggin the Line” by Tommy James and the Shondells. Which I think is where the term “Treehugger” comes from “Huggin a tree when you get near it” was the original lyric which I replaced with “you should have chopped more trees instead of hugging them”
Hide The Decline Shirt and Mug Now Available!
http://www.cafepress.com/m4gw
Thanks, also to JibJab.com for their great animations.
Go to JibJab.com and make your own great videos.
That's what I've read from several sources. Heard it on TV once too. Don't know his current status at the Channel. Here's some urls + a You Tube from him: Here
"CO2 emissions will be on top of the agenda at the Copenhagen summit in December
Photo: Getty"
When the photo is of cooling towers -- discharging nothing more than water vapor condensing as it hits the cooler air. The same stunt is also used in most of the iconic photos of nuclear plants. (The reactor is in that innocent-looking dome off to the side -- apparently doing nothing...)
Idiots!!!
When I saw the thread title, my thought was "what could be a bigger scandal". But you are correct...banning DDT was worse.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.