Free Republic 1st Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $21,387
24%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 24% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Posts by ancient_geezer

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Tesla Roadster - The most fun you can have without fuel [Jay Leno reviews plug in electric car]

    07/10/2007 2:38:58 PM PDT · 26 of 62
    ancient_geezer to TWohlford

    Dem balloons provide a great simulation of a blowout when they bust too. A 2fer!!!!

  • Tesla Roadster - The most fun you can have without fuel [Jay Leno reviews plug in electric car]

    07/10/2007 2:29:38 PM PDT · 23 of 62
    ancient_geezer to JamesP81

    I’m sure going to be miss the majestic roar of a 350 small block chevy.

    A poker card in the wheel spokes works good. Kids these days jess don' know nut'in ;O)

  • U.S. appeals court orders dismissal of domestic spying suit

    07/06/2007 10:33:40 AM PDT · 12 of 14
    ancient_geezer to 3AngelaD

    Fact of the matter is, if you are not a terrorist, or talking to overseas terrorists on the phone, no one is listening to your conversations. No one.

    Most times, not even the person being called is actually listening, LOL.

  • Temperature roller coaster (Record Cold in Scranton, PA...Global Warming?)

    06/30/2007 8:05:19 PM PDT · 21 of 22
    ancient_geezer to Gondring

    So you seem to be in the camp that calls a semi-automatic hunting rifle an "assault weapon" just beacuse "the usage has been decided" by the gubmint.

    So how many folks have lost the .legal battle for failing to recognize the the usage of that term in law?

    They one that round very handily I would say, because we allowed them to define the usage of said term in law and the courts and have been paying a heavy price ever since.

    Common usage means nothing in a court of law, the legal and treaty definitions rule whenever they are defined in statute; A condition to the detriment of many a person attempting to fight a legal and political battle not recognising the political meanings of the terms of art they are faced with.

    Argue science when the fight is one of politics will ultimately loose the war that much be fought in these issues.

  • Temperature roller coaster (Record Cold in Scranton, PA...Global Warming?)

    06/30/2007 7:57:05 PM PDT · 19 of 22
    ancient_geezer to Gondring

    So you seem to be in the camp that calls a semi-automatic hunting rifle an "assault weapon" just beacuse "the usage has been decided" by the gubmint.

     

    When you don’t recognize the political stakes and terms of the debate, in this case national sovereignty, and personal freedom. You loose.

    The debate is political, not scientific.

    " 'science for policy' must be recognized as a different enterprise than 'science itself"

    Your issues are a nonstarter in the international political debate where the real fight must be fought.

     

    You are aware, no doubt, of Dr. Schneider’s earlier comments on climate.

    Of that I am very much aware, I am also aware the Schneider and his ilk will win, if we don't take on the "science for policy", i.e. political fight that must be fought far a beyond that of science fact.

    Losing the propaganda war by falling into the bait and switch semantic trap will be the real disaster. Conceding the existence of "Climate Change" by allowing the inclusion of that treaty defined term into law out of lack of understanding the import of its meaning under treaties and international law will indeed be death knell of political debate that stands before us.

  • A Gorey Mess

    06/30/2007 9:32:28 AM PDT · 14 of 19
    ancient_geezer to DEEP_e
    The UN/IPCC plan is nothing more than an elaborate bait and switch scam using treating defined terms and concensus politics to drive toward global political and economic regulation agendas.

     

    An Economist's Perspective on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol,
    by
    Ross McKitrick. November 2003
    http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/McKitrick.pdf

    The 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) defined "climate change" as follows:

    • "Climate change" means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.
      ( http://unfccc.int/index.html )

    The recent Third Assessment Report (TAR) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) defined it differently ( http://www.ipcc.ch/ ):

    • Climate change in IPCC usage refers to any change over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity.

    This is a very important difference: The IPCC is looking for signs of any change, whereas the policy instruments prescribed by the UNFCCC are not triggered unless it is a particular kind of change: that attributable to human activity. When IPCC officials declare that "climate change" is for real, this is about as informative as announcing that the passage of time is for real. Of course the climate changes: if it didn't Winnipeg would still be under a glacier. But the fact that the last ice age ended doesn't imply that the policy mechanisms of the UNFCCC should kick in. That's the problem with the ambiguity over the term "climate change"-and it seems to trip up a lot of people-accepting the reality of "climate change" does not mean accepting the need for policy interventions. And denying that global warming is a problem requiring costly policy measures is not the same as denying "climate change."

     


     

    Mix UN/IPCC consensus driven politics with science the animal you get is anything but science.

     

    The genesis of the UN/IPCC's current uncertainty guidance paper comes from the concepts expressed in this paper authored by Steven Schneider (one of the historical heavy lifters in the anthropogenic global warming crew) on the subject of how uncertainty should be expressed in IPCC papers:

    http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/UncertaintiesGuidanceFinal2.pdf

    "A final note before turning to the specific recommendations themselves-the paper assumes that for most instances in the TAR, a "Bayesian" or "subjective" characterization of probability will be the most appropriate (see, e.g., Edwards, 1992, for a philosophical basis for Baysian methods; for applications of Bayesian methods, see e.g., Anderson, 1998; Howard et al., 1972). The Bayesian paradigm is a formal and rigorous language to communicate uncertainty. In it, a "prior" belief about a probability distribution (typically based on existing evidence) can be updated by new evidence, which causes a revision of the prior, producing a so-called "posterior" probability. Applying the paradigm in the assessment process involves combining individual authors' (and reviewers') Bayesian assessments of probability distributions and would lead to the following interpretation of probability statements: the probability of an event is the degree of belief that exists among lead authors and reviewers that the event will occur, given the observations, modeling results, and theory currently available. When complex systems are the topic, both prior and updated probability distributions usually contain a high degree of (informed) subjectivity. Thus in the TAR, we expect Bayesian approaches to be what is most often meant when probabilities are attached to outcomes with an inherent component of subjectivity or to an assessment of the state of the science from which confidence characterisations are offered."

    And the intent of the use of such terms:

    "It is certainly true that "science" itself strives for objective empirical information to test theory and models. But at the same time "science for policy" must be recognized as a different enterprise than "science" itself, since science for policy (e.g., Ravetz, 1986) involves being responsive to policymakers' needs for expert judgment at a particular time, given the information currently available, even if those judgments involve a considerable degree of subjectivity. "

     

    The same Steven Schneider responsible for this quote:

    "On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but - which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we'd like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public's imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This 'double ethical bind' we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both."
    (Steven Schneider, Quoted in Discover, pp. 45-48, Oct. 1989; and (American Physical Society, APS News August/September 1996).

  • Temperature roller coaster (Record Cold in Scranton, PA...Global Warming?)

    06/30/2007 8:59:43 AM PDT · 16 of 22
    ancient_geezer to Gondring
    P.S. You may find this of interest in regards UN/IPCC estimates of uncertainty. Such have nothing to do with Science and everything to do with politics and political agendas.

    Mix UN/IPCC consensus driven politics with science the animal you get is anything but science.

     

    The genesis of the UN/IPCC's current uncertainty guidance paper comes from the concepts expressed in this paper authored by Steven Schneider (one of the historical heavy lifters in the anthropogenic global warming crew) on the subject of how uncertainty should be expressed in IPCC papers:

    http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/UncertaintiesGuidanceFinal2.pdf

    "A final note before turning to the specific recommendations themselves-the paper assumes that for most instances in the TAR, a "Bayesian" or "subjective" characterization of probability will be the most appropriate (see, e.g., Edwards, 1992, for a philosophical basis for Baysian methods; for applications of Bayesian methods, see e.g., Anderson, 1998; Howard et al., 1972). The Bayesian paradigm is a formal and rigorous language to communicate uncertainty. In it, a "prior" belief about a probability distribution (typically based on existing evidence) can be updated by new evidence, which causes a revision of the prior, producing a so-called "posterior" probability. Applying the paradigm in the assessment process involves combining individual authors' (and reviewers') Bayesian assessments of probability distributions and would lead to the following interpretation of probability statements: the probability of an event is the degree of belief that exists among lead authors and reviewers that the event will occur, given the observations, modeling results, and theory currently available. When complex systems are the topic, both prior and updated probability distributions usually contain a high degree of (informed) subjectivity. Thus in the TAR, we expect Bayesian approaches to be what is most often meant when probabilities are attached to outcomes with an inherent component of subjectivity or to an assessment of the state of the science from which confidence characterisations are offered."

    And the intent of the use of such terms:

    "It is certainly true that "science" itself strives for objective empirical information to test theory and models. But at the same time "science for policy" must be recognized as a different enterprise than "science" itself, since science for policy (e.g., Ravetz, 1986) involves being responsive to policymakers' needs for expert judgment at a particular time, given the information currently available, even if those judgments involve a considerable degree of subjectivity. "

     

    The same Steven Schneider responsible for this quote:

    "On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but - which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we'd like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public's imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This 'double ethical bind' we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both."
    (Steven Schneider, Quoted in Discover, pp. 45-48, Oct. 1989; and (American Physical Society, APS News August/September 1996).

  • Temperature roller coaster (Record Cold in Scranton, PA...Global Warming?)

    06/30/2007 7:02:58 AM PDT · 15 of 22
    ancient_geezer to Gondring

    I refuse to yield that terminology change to the UNFCCC version you use

    LOL, you don't have a say, in the usage it has already been decided by UN treaty obligations.

    Climate Change in regards international law and its US law, as we are adherants to the 1992 "UN Framework Convention on Climate Change ", controls the political debate regarding statutes and regulations.

    Science has nothing to do with it, global political control and regulation of economies is the controlling and end product of this debate. The usage of political terms is a matter of international law and political shenannigans at this point. The issue is about political and economic control and nothing else.

    You may argue your points all you wish, it will not change the terms of the real debate that remains hidden from your view as long as you fail to recognize what the real debate is actually about and insist on arguing from the wrong premises.

    That is why the Political Summary from the IPCC states "Climate Change" is anthropogenic to a 90% certainty. The statement is a political statment not a statement of science. It is based on a concensus , a beysian estimate, of wearing the scientist's frock for cover and misdirection.

  • Temperature roller coaster (Record Cold in Scranton, PA...Global Warming?)

    06/29/2007 7:25:22 PM PDT · 8 of 22
    ancient_geezer to Gondring

    Anyone who denies that climate change is occurring just isn't paying attention.

    The UN/IPCC usage of the term "Climate Change" means anthropogenic cause. It is an apriori assumption implicit in treaty obligations whenever said term is used in the context of political action.

     

    An Economist's Perspective on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol,
    by
    Ross McKitrick. November 2003
    http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/McKitrick.pdf

    The 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) defined "climate change" as follows:

    • "Climate change" means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.
      ( http://unfccc.int/index.html )

    The recent Third Assessment Report (TAR) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) defined it differently ( http://www.ipcc.ch/ ):

    • Climate change in IPCC usage refers to any change over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity.

     

    The main question now is, "How much, if any, is anthropogenic?"

    Anthropogenic cause is presumed within the term "Climate Change" thus no such question remains to be answered in the the view of climate alarmists and political opportunists. In using the term you have stipulated that the cause is anthropogenic.

  • China building more power plants

    06/20/2007 12:03:24 PM PDT · 9 of 32
    ancient_geezer to chessplayer

    "He pointed out that much of China's emissions growth was being driven by consumers in the West buying Chinese goods,"

    That's easy to fix, put high tariff's on Chinese stuff and just quit buying it.

    Emission's problem solved.

  • Duncan Hunter Speaks at Fair Tax Rally

    05/23/2007 10:27:02 AM PDT · 13 of 31
    ancient_geezer to WalterSkinner; Taxman; pigdog; Principled; EternalVigilance; rwrcpa1; phil_will1; kevkrom; ...
    A Taxreform ping for you all.

    If anyone would like to be added to this ping list let me know.

    John Linder in the House(HR25) & Saxby Chambliss Senate(S25) offer a comprehensive bill to kill all federal income, SS/Medicare payroll, and gift/estate taxes outright replacing them with with a national retail sales tax administered by the states.

    for additional information:

  • Climate change talks grow in importance (Global Warming Barf Alert!)

    04/29/2007 6:31:23 AM PDT · 21 of 21
    ancient_geezer to razorback-bert

    I have some carbon (graphite) trapped in a jar.

    That's noth'n, I've got a lump of coal in a sock. So There!! as my daughter would say ;O)

  • ATK Supports Successful Launch of Pegasus Rocket Carrying NASA's AIM Satellite

    04/27/2007 8:36:46 AM PDT · 4 of 6
    ancient_geezer to BenLurkin

    The AIM satellite mission will explore Polar Mesospheric Clouds (PMCs), also called noctilucent clouds. PMCs, form about 50 miles above the Earth's surface and are commonly seen over the polar regions. More recently these clouds have been sighted in Colorado and Utah where they have never before been observed.

     

    Interesting, considering where we are in the present inter-glacial part of the earth's glacial cycle.

     

    Spectrum of 100-kyr glacial cycle: Orbital inclination, not eccentricity
    Richard A. Muller* and Gordon J. MacDonald

    Figure 2. Spectral fingerprints in the vicinity of the 100 kyr peak: (a) for data from Site 607; (b) for data of the SPECMAP stack; (c) for a model with linear response to eccentricity, calculated from the results of Quinn et al. (ref 6); (d) for the nonlinear ice-sheet model of Imbrie and Imbrie (ref 22); and (e) for a model with linear response to the inclination of the Earth's orbit (measured with respect to the invariable plane). All calculations are for the period 0-600 ka. The 100 kyr peak in the data in (a) and (b) do not fit the fingerprints from the theories (c) and (d), but are a good match to the prediction from inclination in (e). return to beginning


    Far more important to our present analysis, however, is the fact that the predicted 100 kyr "eccentricity line" is actually split into 95 and 125 kyr components, in serious conflict with the single narrow line seen in the climate data. The splitting of this peak into a doublet is well known theoretically (see, e.g., ref 5), but in comparisons with data the two peaks in the eccentricity were merged into a single broad peak by the poor resolution of the Blackman-Tukey algorithm (as was done, for example, in ref 8). The single narrow peak in the climate data was likewise broadened, and it appeared to match the broad eccentricity feature.

    ***

    Figure 3. Variations of the inclination vector of the Earth's orbit. The inclination i is the angle between this vector and the vector of the reference frame; Omega is the azimuthal angle = the angle of the ascending node (in astronomical jargon).. In (A), (B), and (C) the measurements are made with respect to the zodiacal (or ecliptic) frame, i.e. the frame of the current orbit of the Earth. In (D), (E), and (F) the motion has been trasformed to the invariable frame, i.e. the frame of the total angular momentum of the solar system. Note that the primary period of oscillation in the zodiacal frame (A) is 70 kyr, but in the invariable plane (D) it is 100 kyr.

     

     

    There is evidence from the Infrared Astronomical Satellite (ref 39) of a narrow dust band extending only two degrees from the invariable plane. The precise location of these bands is uncertain; they may be orbiting in resonant lock with the Earth (ref 40, 41). It is not clear that these bands contain sufficient material to cause the observed climate effects. We note, however, that even small levels of accretion can scavenge greenhouse gases from the stratosphere, and cool the Earth's climate through the mechanism proposed by Hoyle (ref 30). The dust could also affect climate by seeding the formation of much larger ice crystals. The accreting material could be meteoric, originating as particles too large to give detectable infrared radiation.

    Data on noctilucent clouds (mesospheric clouds strongly associated with the effects of high meteors and high altitude dust) supports the hypothesis that accretion increase significantly when the Earth passes through the invariable plane. As shown in Figure 6, a strong peak in the number of observed noctilucent clouds occurs on about July 9 in the northern hemisphere (ref 41, 42) within about a day of the date when the Earth passes through the invariable plane (indicated with an arrow). In the southern hemisphere the peak is approximately on January 9, also consistent with the invariable plane passage, but the data are sparse. The coincidence of the peaks of the clouds with the passage through the invariable plane had not previously been noticed, and it supports the contention that there is a peak in accretion at these times. On about the same date there is a similarly narrow peak is observed in the number of polar mesospheric clouds (ref43) and there is a broad peak in total meteoric flux (ref 44). It is therefore possible that it is the trail of meteors in the upper atmosphere, rather than dust, that is responsible for the climate effects.


    Fig 6. Frequency of noctilucent clouds vs. day of year, in (A) the northern hemisphere, and in (B) the sourthern hemisphere (ref 41, 42). The arrows indicate the dates when the earth passes through the invariable plane. The coincidence of these dates with the maxima in the noctilucent clouds suggests the presence of a thin ring around the sun. Peaks on the same dates are seen in Polar mesospheric clouds (ref 44) and in radar counts of meteors.

     

    Previous article in regards the noctilucent cloud formations:

    http://www.newscientistspace.com/article/dn9228-mysterious-glowing-clouds-targeted-by-nasa.html

    Mysterious glowing clouds targeted by NASA
    26 May, 2006

    High-altitude noctilucent clouds have been mysteriously spreading around the world in recent years (Image: NASA/JSC/ES and IA)

    And coincident dust aggregations:

     

    http://newton.ex.ac.uk/aip/physnews.252.html#1

    INTERPLANETARY DUST PARTICLES (IDPs) are deposited on the Earth at the rate of about 10,000 tons per year. Does this have any effect on climate? Scientists at Caltech have found that ancient samples of helium-3 (coming mostly from IDPs) in oceanic sediments exhibit a 100,000-year periodicity. The researchers assert that their data, taken along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, support a recently enunciated idea that Earth's orbital inclination varies with a 100-kyr period; this notion in turn had been broached as an explanation for a similar periodicity in the succession of ice ages. (K.A. Farley and D.B. Patterson, Nature, 7 December 1995.)
    Farley & Patterson 1998, http://www.elsevier.com/gej-ng/10/20/36/33/37/32/abstract.html
    Farley http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~farley/
    Farley http://www.elsevier.nl/gej-ng/10/18/23/54/21/49/abstract.html

     

    http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/pr96/dec96/noaa96-78.html

    ABRUPT CLIMATE CHANGE DURING LAST GLACIAL PERIOD COULD BE TIED TO DUST-INDUCED REGIONAL WARMING

    Preliminary new evidence suggests that periodic increases in atmospheric dust concentrations during the glacial periods of the last 100,000 years may have resulted in significant regional warming, and that this warming may have triggered the abrupt climatic changes observed in paleoclimate records, according to a scientist at the Commerce Department's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Current scientific thinking is that the dust concentrations contributed to global cooling.

  • Solar Cycle 24 Prediction Official Press Release

    04/26/2007 5:25:43 AM PDT · 12 of 14
    ancient_geezer to Steve Van Doorn
    Thanks for the ping.

    Of interest, the range of the current prediction for Cycle 24 affirms the lower range of longterm estimate, in fact points at an even lower level than that earlier estimate:

     

     

     

    NASA - Long Range Solar Forecast

     

    The ultimate test will be the long term prediction covering cycle 25, which holds the greatest potential for affirming or disproving the connection solar cycle connection with global climate.

     

    The Little Ice Age was a associated with a lack of observed sunspots though several cycles, i.e. the Maunder Minimum.

  • Move to block emissions 'swindle' DVD [Global Warming]

    04/25/2007 8:42:35 AM PDT · 75 of 147
    ancient_geezer to Gondring

    :It’s a shame that those who feel our climate change isn’t anthropogenic feel they must resort to Michael Moore-style lies to make their case.

    Accusing one's opposition of one's own sins hardly a new gambit.

    But then, more in politics than any other endevour the bigger the fabrication, the more likely it will be received by the intended audience:

     

     

    POLITICS OF CATASTROPHE IN A NUTSHELL:
    (Lessons of history)

     

    “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.
    -- H. L. Mencken

    • “A hypothesis is always preferable to the truth, for we tailor a hypothesis to fit our opinion of the truth, whereas the truth is only its own awkward self. Ergo, never discover the truth when a hypothesis will do.”

    • “For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearances, as though they were realities, and are often more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are.”

    • “Therefore a wise prince ought to adopt such a course that his citizens will always in every sort and kind of circumstance have need of the state and of him, and then he will always find them faithful.”

    • “Besides what has been said, people are fickle by nature; and it is a simple to convince them of something but difficult to hold them in that conviction; and, therefore, affairs should be managed in such a way that when they no longer believe, they can be made to believe by force.”
      -- Nicolo Machiavelli

    “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
    -- H. L. Mencken

     

  • Relax, the planet is fine

    04/25/2007 8:24:14 AM PDT · 25 of 42
    ancient_geezer to Zon

    It's almost as though they took a page right out of the Dark Ages.

    Almost? These methods have been around throughout history.

     

     

    POLITICS OF CATASTROPHE IN A NUTSHELL:

     

    “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.
    -- H. L. Mencken

    • “A hypothesis is always preferable to the truth, for we tailor a hypothesis to fit our opinion of the truth, whereas the truth is only its own awkward self. Ergo, never discover the truth when a hypothesis will do.”

    • “For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearances, as though they were realities, and are often more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are.”

    • “Therefore a wise prince ought to adopt such a course that his citizens will always in every sort and kind of circumstance have need of the state and of him, and then he will always find them faithful.”

    • “Besides what has been said, people are fickle by nature; and it is a simple to convince them of something but difficult to hold them in that conviction; and, therefore, affairs should be managed in such a way that when they no longer believe, they can be made to believe by force.”
      -- Nicolo Machiavelli

    “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
    -- H. L. Mencken

  • Singapore meeting takes on climate change

    04/19/2007 8:15:49 AM PDT · 3 of 3
    ancient_geezer to NormsRevenge

    SINGAPORE (AFP) - More than 600 business executives and experts began meeting in Singapore on Thursday to discuss how the corporate world can help tackle the threat of climate change.

     

    Garbage in, Garbage out

    An Economist's Perspective on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol,
    by
    Ross McKitrick. November 2003
    http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/McKitrick.pdf

    The 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) defined "climate change" as follows:

    • "Climate change" means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.
      ( http://unfccc.int/index.html )

    The recent Third Assessment Report (TAR) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) defined it differently ( http://www.ipcc.ch/ ):

    • Climate change in IPCC usage refers to any change over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity.

    This is a very important difference: The IPCC is looking for signs of any change, whereas the policy instruments prescribed by the UNFCCC are not triggered unless it is a particular kind of change: that attributable to human activity. When IPCC officials declare that "climate change" is for real, this is about as informative as announcing that the passage of time is for real. Of course the climate changes: if it didn't Winnipeg would still be under a glacier. But the fact that the last ice age ended doesn't imply that the policy mechanisms of the UNFCCC should kick in. That's the problem with the ambiguity over the term "climate change"-and it seems to trip up a lot of people-accepting the reality of "climate change" does not mean accepting the need for policy interventions. And denying that global warming is a problem requiring costly policy measures is not the same as denying "climate change."

     


     

     

    United Kingdom Parliment,
    Select Committee on Economic Affairs Written Evidence
    published 21 June 2005
    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldeconaf/12/12we16.htm

    Memorandum by Ross McKitrick, Associate Professor of Economics, University of Guelph

    INTRODUCTION

      I am an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada. I specialize in environmental economics and issues related to climate change. My research is funded by the federally-funded Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, through peer-reviewed grant competitions.

      I am pleased that your Inquiry is taking up issues related to the IPCC process. I have observed this organization very closely over the past few years and I believe a critical outside assessment is overdue. The IPCC exerts tremendous global influence over energy, environment and climate policies, yet is effectively unaccountable. They have not won over any of their prominent critics since the mid-1990s, meanwhile new, credible experts continue to come forward with doubts about the IPCC's credibility.

      In this submission I would like to explain two concerns I have regarding the IPCC:

    • —  It appears to have little or no working relationship with the mainstream academic economics community;
    • —  It has exaggerated the rigor of its scientific review process.

    1.   The lack of connection between the IPCC and the academic economics community

      One of the striking differences between the Second Assessment Report of 1995 and the Third Assessment Report of 2001 is the loss of participation of mainstream economists in the latter. A comparison of the lists of chapter contributors (especially in Working Group II) between the reports will confirm that the IPCC could no longer claim to have the participation of mainstream professional economists after 1995.

      In recent years some economists have taken greater notice of the IPCC's work because of the efforts of Ian Castles and David Henderson to focus expert attention on the "Special Report on Emission Scenarios" (SRES). This has led to a growing body of criticism of the IPCC's handling of economic issues. The SRES does not use conventional economic modeling to produce what would normally be called "forecasts" or "projections". They call their outputs "storylines" and "scenarios" and emphasize that they are speculative, yet at the same time they market the results as "predictions". For example, the back cover of the SRES Report states (emphasis added):

    • The [IPCC] Special Report on Emission Scenarios describes new scenarios of the future, and predicts greenhouse gas emissions associated with such developments .  .  . The scenarios provide the basis for future assessments of climate change and possible response strategies.

      The list of contributors to the SRES and to the IPCC (WGII) Report[78] includes a small and non-representative sample of economists, amongst a long list of government bureaucrats and academics from other disciplines. Moreover I know that some of the contributing economists are quite critical of the final Reports. One of them is John Reilly of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In an article in Canada's National Post (27 November 2002) he said that the SRES exercise was "in my view, a kind of insult to science" and the method was "lunacy". He said his lab refused a request from the IPCC to let their models be "tweaked" to support the IPCC scenarios.

      In Canada there is a large community of academic economists, many with an international reputation, working in the fields of natural resource, energy and environmental economics. None of the participants in our annual research study group, numbering close to one hundred members drawn from universities across Canada and the US, is involved with the IPCC or had any hand in the SRES Report.

      I recently completed a study, [79]coauthored with Mark Strazicich of Appalachian State University, that confirms the SRES emission scenarios are unrealistically high. We used time series econometric methods to analyze data on per capita carbon dioxide emissions for 121 countries around the world. We are able to show that the global per capita CO2 emissions level is a stationary constant (neither drifting nor trending upwards) with a long term mean of 1.14 tonnes per person and a standard deviation of 0.02. The mean has not changed for several decades, and indeed is trending slightly downwards since the early 1980s (see figure below). If emissions average just over 1.1 tonnes per person, and population peaks (as expected) at about nine billion mid-century, we can expect peak emissions of about 10 billion tonnes by 2050. Yet most IPCC scenarios are between 15 and 30 billion tonnes at 2050, a range that sits well above the plausible upper bound.


      We calculated the implied global per capita emission levels associated with each of the 40 SRES scenarios over the next 50 years and computed the probability of observing each one. Only seven of the 40 SRES scenarios remain within five standard deviations of the current mean through the year 2050. Many depart more than 10 standard deviations above the observed mean; eight lie more than fifty standard deviations above the observed mean.

      Most scenarios are so improbable they should never have been published in the first place. The seven scenarios that we found remotely possible imply a range of total global CO2 emissions from 9.1 to 11.2 Gigatonnes as of 2050, with a mean of about 10.1 Gigatonnes as of 2050. Yet, as I mentioned, the bulk of the SRES scenarios imply emissions of 15 Gigatonnes or more as of 2050.

      I should emphasize that what Mark Strazicich and I did was merely to apply some standard statistical tests for evaluating economic forecasts. It would have been obvious to most economists to do so. In presenting it to our colleagues a typical reaction is surprise that the IPCC didn't check these things themselves. A recently received comment (from one of the few academic economists in North America who has studied the SRES scenarios closely) stated: "the key findings really are important. Essentially, I think they demolish the SRES exercise—something that I think was overdue."

      The fact that the SRES document was used for the Third Assessment Report without discovering these (and other) problems illustrates my first concern about the lack of serious economics capability in the IPCC milieu.

    ***

  • Radical Environmentalism Revealed: Ending Sovereignty and Private Property

    04/16/2007 9:30:26 AM PDT · 36 of 45
    ancient_geezer to rbg81

    Global warming is right out of the Clinton playbook. Al Gore and his merry band of global socialists learned well.

    More like straight out of Machiavelli, nothing new. Same centuries ole game, just the labels change.

     

     

     

    POLITICS OF CATASTROPHE IN A NUTSHELL:
    (Lessons of history)

     

    “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.
    -- H. L. Mencken

    • “A hypothesis is always preferable to the truth, for we tailor a hypothesis to fit our opinion of the truth, whereas the truth is only its own awkward self. Ergo, never discover the truth when a hypothesis will do.”

    • “For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearances, as though they were realities, and are often more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are.”

    • “Therefore a wise prince ought to adopt such a course that his citizens will always in every sort and kind of circumstance have need of the state and of him, and then he will always find them faithful.”

    • “Besides what has been said, people are fickle by nature; and it is a simple to convince them of something but difficult to hold them in that conviction; and, therefore, affairs should be managed in such a way that when they no longer believe, they can be made to believe by force.”
      -- Nicolo Machiavelli

    “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
    -- H. L. Mencken


     

    The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.
    -- Plato

     

  • Global Warming Becoming A New Source Of Revenue For Gamblers

    04/14/2007 7:10:06 AM PDT · 3 of 18
    ancient_geezer to Dahoser

    A fool and his money are soon parted.

  • Global warning: Scientist who worked on U.N. study says warming issue can no longer be ignored

    04/07/2007 2:02:03 PM PDT · 22 of 78
    ancient_geezer to ricks_place

    Two hundred scientists from around the world helped write the international document, and its summary findings were formally unveiled in Brussels on Friday. The importance of this report, Running said, is that it is the document “we know the politicians and world leaders pay attention to.”

     

    "To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public's imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have."
    --- Steven Schneider, Quoted in Discover, pp. 45-48, Oct. 1989; and American Physical Society, APS News August/September 1996.

    "Scientists who want to attract attention to themselves, who want to attract great funding to themselves, have to (find a) way to scare the public . . . and this you can achieve only by making things bigger and more dangerous than they really are."
    --- Petr Chylek, Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, commenting on reports that Greenland's glaciers are melting. Halifax Chronicle-Herald, August 22, 2001

    "Emphasis on extreme scenarios may have been appropriate at one time, when the public and decision-makers were relatively unaware of the global warming issue, and energy sources such as "synfuels," shale oil and tar sands were receiving strong consideration."
    -- James Hansen, stated in presentation to Council on Environmental Quality, June 12, 2003

    "The data don't matter. We're not basing our recommendations [for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions] upon the data. We're basing them upon the climate models"
    (Chris Folland, UK Meteorological Office)