We credit the great Andrew Bolt down under for putting together these two quotes from ABC science presenter Robyn Williams. Hilarious.
Robyn Williams in 2007:
Andrew Bolt: I’m telling you, there’s a lot of fear out there. So what I do is, when I see an outlandish claim being made…so Tim Flannery suggesting rising seas this next century eight stories high, Professor Mike Archer, dean of engineering at the University of NSW…
Robyn Williams: Dean of science.
Andrew Bolt: Dean of science…suggesting rising seas this next century of up to 100 metres, or Al Gore six metres. When I see things like that I know these are false. You mentioned the IPCC report; that suggests, at worst on best scenarios, 59 centimetres.
Robyn Williams: Well, whether you take the surge or whether you take the actual average rise are different things.
Andrew Bolt: I ask you, Robyn, 100 metres in the next century…do you really think that?
The issue has been bombarded with misinformation… And after Climategate – too much mea culpa. It’s time for (scientists) to get their skates on. To be aggressive in the cause of truth.
What are the lessons of Climategate? More honesty and transparency in science? Not according to attorney Alan Nelson in the Guardian UK today. To him, the lesson is how not to get caught next time.
So how do universities and academics ensure that their correspondence does not become the “smoking gun” that turns a simple FoI request into an international scandal?
It is not inconceivable that where a university is working on some research that has a commercial sponsor, pressure could be exerted on researchers to reach a certain conclusion, or to portray the results in a way that would be helpful to the sponsor. Where that is the case, do you really want email correspondence going on record about the way in which the results are portrayed? Careful consideration needs to be given to the tone of any email exchange, so the university's position is clear. The best advice is: think twice before you hit the send button.
Remember, informal email discussions that you have with a close colleague are no longer private and could be disclosed in the future. Will the possibly uninformed reader who asked for the emails be aware of the context in which they were written? Do you really want people to know the nicknames you have given to some of your collaborators?
For sensitive information that you would not want in the public domain, rather than putting it in email or in a document, it may be better to discuss it face-to-face or on the phone.
Careful consideration should also be given to how long emails are saved and when they are deleted. In some fields of work, there will be regulatory reasons for keeping emails (clinical work, for example) but do they all need to be retained and archived? A periodic review should be performed to ensure that, wherever possible and lawful, emails that could be that smoking gun are deleted.
When making handwritten notes or comments on documents, staff need to be aware that those scribbles could enter the public domain in response to a FoI request. Do you really want someone to see your exclamations of “Idiot!!!” or “Rubbish!!!” on a note? Probably not, so take care – and shred your notes once they have served their useful purpose. Imagine your embarrassment when comments about how doddery your head of department is, or how pompous your vice-chancellor is, or how adorable he or she is, come out in the open.
Another thing to consider is the evolution of a document from first draft to final agreed version. No doubt, along the way there will have been discussions that may mean the final version is very different from the first draft. Is it helpful to retain every draft and set of comments? What message do they give to the uninformed reader with a particular agenda?
Ah, those brilliant lawyers, always looking out for our best interest.
Blogger TonyN at Harmless Sky has written up something I think you all should go take a look at. He’s done a very interesting analysis of the latest IPPC Assessment Report and has come up with some important questions, and invites others to help him answer them. It’s not your usual science debunking piece.
This paragraph describes the basis of his investigation:
The effect on the IPCC’s reputation, and that of its chairman Dr Rajendra Pachauri, has been devastating, but at every stage of this scandal we have been assured that the core science underpinning concern about anthropogenic climate change has remained unscathed. The IPCC and its supporters have been able to undertake this damage limitation exercise because attention so far has focused on only one of the three sections of the most recent assessment report: Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. This deals with the symptoms and perceived consequences of climate change. The core scientific evidence that the climate is changing and that human influence is playing a part in this is contained in another section of the report, Working Group I: Climate Change 2007: the Physical Basis. But can we be confident that the same problems of sloppy authorship and exaggeration do not extend to this part of the IPCC’s assessment too?
The article goes on to look at how the IPCC authors assign words like “likely,” “very likely,” “extremely likely” and so on, to probabilities, in percentage ranges, of the likelihood of certain events occurring. It’s fascinating. And it begs comparison to how climate scientists are characterizing the chances of catastrophic events.
He introduces some common sense questions:
The conclusion that the IPCC draws from this is that, although there is a significant level of uncertainty as to whether the frequency of heat waves has increased during the last half century, and there is even more uncertainty as to whether, if the frequency has in fact increased, this can be attributed to human influence, a prediction can be made that heatwaves will increase during the next ninety years as a result of anthropogenic global warming. The ‘likelihood’ assigned to this is of 90-94%. Therefore according to the IPCC, confidence in the prediction is higher than confidence in either the observations or the hypothesis that the prediction is based on.
This makes no sense to me, but then I am not a scientist, let alone a climate scientist. It would be very interesting to hear the views of researchers from other disciplines, not on the merits of the scientific evidence, but as to whether this table does in fact defy logic.
This could be a simple, but very important analysis of the IPPC Report, and I’m interested to hear your thoughts on it. And so is the author.
USA Today reports that US schools are finally calling for both sides of global warming to be taught, because it is after all, a theory — not a fact:
The teaching of climate change is under attack in some U.S. public schools. This week, South Dakota’s Legislature passed a resolution calling for the “balanced teaching of global warming.”
“Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant but rather a highly beneficial ingredient for all plant life,” says the resolution, which passed with mostly GOP votes. It also says global warming is “a scientific theory rather than a proven fact” and a variety of “astrological” and other “dynamics” affect weather.
That last paragraph is really going to send alarmists over the edge.
Europeans have long traded excessive taxation for being taken care of by the government. But I have a feeling that they too, like us Americans, are at a tipping point. Damn the growing evidence that climate science hasn’t been so scientific, the EU is about to get hit with their first “federal” tax under the pretext of saving the planet for our children.
In a flexing of its federal muscle the European Union (EU) is reported as drawing up plans for its first direct tax with proposals expected to be announced next month that will provide the United States of Europe with its first funding derived from direct taxation.
Although many people are ignorant of the fact the EU has appointed a “commissioner for taxation” who is said to be planning a “minimum rate of tax on carbon” to be imposed across the federal union.
How will the citizens of the EU be taxed?
“We should have a mechanism which would serve to exploit the possibility, in a progressive way, to lead to direct funding of the EU”.
The proposed federal tax will lead directly to rises in petrol and energy bills and indirectly to price increases relating to the production and distribution of goods.
The think-tank Open Europe has calculated, on the basis of the shelved 2005 proposal, that based on a £9 levy on a tonne of CO2, that the cost of the new tax to British businesses and consumers would be at least £3 billion.
And what do the member nations of the EU think about this? We don’t know about the rest, but France and Sweden are are enthusiastic supporters of an EU carbon tax “as a part of Europe’s fight against climate change.”
I have a feeling that European citizens are becoming less “progressive” than their governments, and are not ready to join the New Green Order. How do you say Tea Party in Eurospeak?
Warmers talk incessantly, and catastrophically, about the need to reduce greenhouse gases. If the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere rise, so does the temperature, and soon enough we will all die, they say. But what would happen if the reverse were to occur? What if we were too successful at reducing greenhouse gases? Can we actually calculate the correct amount by which to reduce, and what would happen to temperatures? Would a 1% reduction in CO2, for example, reduce temperatures by 1%.
No. Too much of a reduction could actually be quite — to use their the warmers second favorite word (the first is “settled”) — catastrophic.
The greenhouse gasses keep the Earth 30° C warmer than it would otherwise be without them in the atmosphere, so instead of the average surface temperature being -15° C, it is 15° C. Carbon dioxide contributes 10% of the effect so that is 3° C. The pre-industrial level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 280 ppm. So roughly, if the heating effect was a linear relationship, each 100 ppm contributes 1° C. With (Read more...)
Britain is facing many problems, not the least of which is meeting its energy needs in the coming years. Christopher Booker of the Telegraph UK looks at Britain’s nonsensical energy policy. He questions how his country will be able to avert its looming shortage of energy, with 40% of their generating capacity set to disappear in the coming years as they close 14 major nuclear and coal-fired power stations.
He finds no real answers in the “four pillars” of the UK’s energy policy:
The first is that electricity companies should not be allowed to replace those coal-fired power stations which help provide us with 35 per cent of our electricity unless new ones are fitted with a system to pipe off their CO2 emissions and bury them under the North Sea. The Government has allocated some £4 billion for four new plants to pioneer this unproven technology (to be paid for by all of us through electricity bills), but the Tories say that no new plants should be permitted unless carbon capture is already in place.
The Tories’ second headline policy is what they call a “decentralised energy revolution”, subsidising millions of homeowners, firms, schools and hospitals to cover their roofs with solar panels and mini wind turbines. Again, the Government has already got on to this one with its new “feed-in tariff” scheme, appropriately due to start on All Fools’ Day. This will pay 34.5p to the owners of mini-turbines for each kilowatt hour (kWh) of power they feed into the grid, and 41p per kWh for electricity from photovoltaic panels. Even The Guardian’s green crusader, George Monbiot, has denounced this as a scandal, which he estimates will add £8.6 billion to our electricity bills over 20 years.
…the third pillar of their energy policy, which is to support the Government’s plan to see £100 billion spent on 10,000 giant wind turbines, in a further desperate bid to meet the EU’s requirement that, within 10 years, 32 per cent of our electricity must come from renewables. (Last Thursday, our 2,900 existing turbines met just 0.1 per cent of demand, or 1,000th of the electricity we were all using.) Again, even if it were worth doing, there is not the faintest chance that we could install three giant offshore and onshore turbines up to 650 feet high, each costing up to £4 million or more (and almost all produced and installed by foreign-owned companies), every day between now and 2020.
And what is the fourth pillar of the Tories’ energy policy? They want every home in the country to be fitted, at a cost of a further £10 billion, with “smart meters”, to allow for “better management of supply and demand”. Indeed, that is precisely the point about smart meters. They not only allow consumers to monitor their own electricity usage, they also allow electricity companies to “manage supply”, by cutting off the power when not enough is available to the grid.
It sounds like a plan dreamed up by some politically correct schoolchildren. You know, like those we have in the US congress across the pond.
Chris Horner at Pajamas Media by Chris Horner writes on out anFOIA request reveals the Department of Energy turned to George Soros and to wind industry lobbyists to help cover up two economic studies pointing to the failure of European wind energy programs.
As candidate and president, on eight separate occasions Barack Obama instructed Americans to “think about what’s happening in countries like Spain [and] Germany” if they wanted to know what successful “green jobs” policies look like, and if they wanted to know what we should expect here in the U.S. from his agenda.
Some European economists took a look. In March, a research team from Madrid’s King Juan Carlos University produced a detailed, substantive, heavily sourced, two-method paper: “Study of the Effects on Employment of Public Aid to Renewable Energy Sources.” The paper concluded that Spain’s “green jobs” program was an economic failure, in fact costing Spain many jobs.
The president of Spain’s renewable energy association — along with a Communist Party affiliated trade federation — decried the paper’s lead author as being unpatriotic.
The former wrote in Spain’s leading paper, El Mundo, slamming the research paper. However, he did not critique the paper itself (Read more...)
From a Columbia University press release, here’s a case where the early speculation of science was wrong. Originally global warming was blamed, but it turns out to be El Niño helping along an already established pathogen.
El Niño and a pathogen killed Costa Rican toad, study finds
Challenges evidence that global warming was the cause
The Monteverde golden toad disappeared from Costa Rica Pacific coastal forest in the late 1980s. Credit: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Scientists broadly agree that global warming may threaten the survival of many plant and animal species; but global warming did not kill the Monteverde golden toad, an often cited example of climate-triggered extinction, says a new study. The toad vanished from Costa Rica’s Pacific coastal-mountain cloud forest in the late 1980s, the apparent victim of a pathogen outbreak that has wiped out dozens of other amphibians in the Americas. Many researchers have linked outbreaks of the deadly chytrid fungus to climate change, but the new study asserts that the weather patterns, at Monteverde at least, were not out of the ordinary.
Professor Carter submitted his article, on James Hansen and the Hansenism cult, and the ABC has rejected his article – which Quadrant Online is privileged to publish.
Climategate is going general interest, and more and more people are being exposed to the lies of the warmers; most of these readers would have never otherwise heard a skeptical word.
The “greatest generation” aren’t going to be too happy to hear that Avatar director James Cameron considers himself and other greens, warriors who are facing down a threat as severe as our World War II veterans did against Germany and Japan.
I was thrilled to see the global warming busting article, “In Denial” online at The Weekly Standard website. And then I thought I’d take a look at where it was in the print version of the magazine. That’s when I saw it was the cover story, accompanied by the best damn illustration mocking Al Gore I think I’ve ever seen. It’s a beauty!
Disgraced Professor Phil Jones of Britain’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and his boss, Professor Edward Acton, head of the University of East Anglia appear to have been exposed in a blatant attempt to pervert justice. The Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI) has released evidence that proves Jones lied to Parliament during his testimony last week on the Climategate scandal.
Geologists have found evidence that sea ice extended to the equator 716.5 million years ago, bringing new precision to a “snowball Earth” event long suspected of occurring around that time.
ABC chairman Maurice Newman has attacked the media for being too willing to accept the conventional wisdom on climate change. Mow if only he could help his journos to see the light…..I won’t hold my breath!
In a compiling list of events, this is about the “Gates” that have been open to the failings of the Alarmist Agenda. Hence, this is what has happened in the Climate arena the last 3 or so months that’s been pulled out into the open.
Per C3 from NOAA data the US is at a negative seven degrees per century trend.
Real Cause of Toyota Sticking Throttles Discovered! Submitted by John D. Nier
Al Gore announced today he’s discovered the cause of sticking throttles on Toyotas..It’s Global Warming!!! Al immediately vowed to write a new book titled ”An Unintended Acceleration”
None of us will be able to eat or have shelter…but hot damn! We’ll have no global warming. ”The California Air Resources Board last year projected the law would add 120,000 jobs to the economy by 2020.” This is why they are now referred to as California Agency of Retarded Bureaucrats. What do we do for the next 10 years morons in Sacramento? Eat cake?
According to Dr. Bill Wattenburg’s letter. CARB doesn’t stand for California Air Resources Board it stands for California Agency of Retarded Bureaucrats. Read it a KILLCARB.ORG
Is it global warming? Hormones causing heat flashes? Let’s forget the science, just start up the bleeding hearts to get what you want. A new low for AGW beleivers.
The world will almost certainly fail to draw up a new treaty on climate change this year, the minister in charge of last year’s Copenhagen summit has admitted, delivering a heavy blow to the barely flickering hopes for a swift global settlement.
”WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is seeking public comment on the annual Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2008 draft report. This report will be open for public comment for 30 days after the Federal Register notice is published. ”
Roy Innis, Chairman of CORE (Congress of Racial Equality)“A cap-and-trade scheme is nothing more than a cap-and-tax on every American — a tax that will hurt poor families the most.” Professor Richard Lindzen puts it, “One of the things the scientific community is pretty agreed on is those things [CO2 limits] will have virtually no impact on climate no matter what the models say.”
[Climategate] has done for the climate change debate what the Pentagon Papers did for the Vietnam war debate 40 years ago–changed the narrative decisively.
Bill Gray, Professor Emeritus, Colorado State University added, “Over 31,000 American scientists have recently signed a petition advising the U.S. not to sign any fossil fuel reduction treaty.”
Thomas Friedman, respected opinion writer for The New York Times, stated in a recent column that top climate-science experts should stop using the term “global warming,” and instead use “global weirding.”
“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC
The possibility of suspending California’s Global Warming Solutions Act, a law unlikely to change temperatures but certain to wreak economic havoc, appears to have increased dramatically.
According to the Renewable Energy Association, plans for more than 50 biomass projects, totalling £13bn of investment, have now been suspended as a result of uncertainty over the level of support they will receive.
Guess what they claim is causing it – cold wet summers – not the barbecue ones that the Met Office said we’d get through Global Warming but the cold wet ones caused by the very same Global Warming – yeah yeah yeah.
“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” - Club of Rome
Enzo Ferarri must be spinning in his grave. Hybrid Ferraris? I can’t fathom anyone spending $300k + on a car so save a few bucks on gas. But I guess the rich need to look like they’re ”Green.” It’s a big joke in my book.
”Without any oversight, accounting, or transparency, environmental activist groups have surreptitiously received at least $37 million from the federal government for questionable “attorney fees.” The lawsuits they received compensation for had nothing to do with environmental protection or improvement. Nine national environmental activist groups alone have filed more than 3,300 suits, every single one seeking attorney fees. The groups have also charged as much as $650 per hour (a f…
”If the rise in the Earth’s climate keeps getting warmer, then all the oceans inhabitants will die from lack of oxygen” These people need to get a clue.
The article appears to be ’maybe’ based on ’what if’ with a conclusion that no one knows or has done any studies. It is therefore as persuasive as anything the IPCC have produced.
”For the record, before anyone raises the canard about satellite data showing a similar trend to the surface stations, it’s worth bearing in mind that the satellites are calibrated against the surface data, so if the surface data is wrong the satellite data will be too.”
”They give no reason at all to suspect that the graph published there does not come from the raw data they make available. We noticed for ourselves that their raw data does not produce the graph they publish”
”The next global warming believer who raises ”peer review” as a defence of global warming deserves to be metaphorically tarred and feathered and laughed at for the rest of his or her natural life.”
”A flaw in the previous Government’s ETS was that it heavily penalised landowners for clearing tree weeds. These regulations fix this problem and ensure that the ETS does not inadvertently result in more tree weeds.”
He fits in well with Gore, and Pachauri. ”This is the same Ehrlich who wrote that he would take even money that England would not exist in 2000. Oops. Ehrlich has been a Malthusian doom-monger his entire career, during which humanity has thrived. You could literally become a millionaire by betting against his every statement.”
Someone who can tell the truth will do. The prophets Gore and Pachauri have been rumbled. ”Only one American in three believes that human beings are responsible for climate change. The proportion of UK adults who believe that global warming is ”definitely” a reality has plummeted from 44% to 31% in the last 12 months.”
They supposedly went and saw all the ice melting, They were never on the ship. When this expediton took place the ship was on the St. Lawrence River. They even lied about how many people were on the ship….“Presumably this expedition was doubly politically correct, in that not only were these scientists checking global warming, but they must have all been gay, as they were sleeping a dozen per bed. Even better than the gay penguins story!” Only cost the Canadian Taxpayers $156 mil…
”It’s official: the consensus for Man-made Climate Change is now over-unanimous. The results from a recent poll conducted by the Mann-Hansen Group strongly support Man-made Climate Change theories by 130% for to -50% against. This unprecedented result was obtained by counting a ’no’ vote as a negative response which is added by subtracting. This also generates a positive feedback raising the pro vote beyond the 100% level.”
Al’s delusional. ”“There has been a very large, organized campaign to try to convince people that it [global warming] is not real, to try to convince people that they shouldn’t worry about it. In my country, the oil and coal companies spent $500 million last year just on television advertising just on these questions. There are now five anti-climate lobbyists on Capitol Hill in Washington for every member of the House and Senate. So it’s been a very massive, organiz…
People aren’t beleiving Al anymore. He’s lost his touch……………… ”We need one passionate, persuasive scientist who can connect and convince – not because he preaches apocalypse in gory (Gorey?) detail, but in simple, overwhelming terms. We need to be taught to believe by a true believer in a world where belief is the fatal, missing ingredient. Well Hallalujah!!!
The Environmental Protection Agency may have suppressed an internal report that was skeptical of claims about global warming, including whether carbon dioxide must be strictly regulated by the federal government, according to a series of newly disclosed e-mail messages.
The government wants to brainwash you and they’re speding a lot of money on studies on how to do it. ”A significant amount of that money is spent by one government department, DEFRA, on ”behavioural research”, and a record of its recent expenditure provides a chilling testament to the Orwellian world of climate advocacy, where every aspect of our lives is coming under official scrutiny….The department also spent £109,710 asking Brook Lyndhurst to report on R…
”Only 61 of the 260 references relied on in that chapter have their feet firmly planted in peer-reviewed literature – an abysmal 24 percent. Put another way, three-quarters of the material cited there is grey literature.”
Dr. Strangelove rears his ugly head. It’s not the bomb anynmore. The warmers have something new to get their panties in a bunch over. METHANE! This will surely be a new crisis requiring the Goracle’s immediate attention and cause governments world wide to scream taxation! Methane trading! (Not to mention it will get us to forget about all the CO2 silliness).
Dr. Everett led work for the IPCC on five impact analyses from 1988-2000: Fisheries (Convening Lead Author), Polar ReIPCC Nobel Prize Recognition to John T. Everettgions (Co-Chair), Oceans (Lead Author), and Oceans and Coastal Zones (Co-Chair/2 reports). He also was a Contributing Expert in developing the IPCC Impact Assessment Methodology protocol. See IPCC Nobel Prize recognition. He was on the Board coordinating the NOAA Climate Change Research Program.
Regarding the move to block the EPA’s CO2 finding…facts won’t work so let’s lie!… ”The ads claim that the resolution ’guts America’s clean air laws.’ But there aren’t any laws already restricting carbon dioxide. The resolution prohibits the EPA from making new regulations. It doesn’t require it to dispense with already existing ones.”
Last year, 127 million litres of palm oil was added to diesel sold to motorists in Britain, including 64 million litres from Malaysia and 27 million litres from Indonesia. Kenneth Richter, biofuels campaigner for Friends of the Earth, said: “The billions of subsidy for biofuels would be better spent on greener cars and improved public transport.”
Bob Carter, an Aussie geologist and climate change scientist, writes a brilliant essay comparing the nightmare world of Soviet Lysenkoism to today’s dangerous obessesion with the non-problem of man made global warming. This is a ’must read’ I highly recommend.
Ed Shearon: Gotta admire that spin to try and divert attention from posting this goofy event and then misrepresenting what happened. Is it bad for everyone if most of Russia and Canada benefits, but equatorial regions have big population displacements? Or do we just say good for Russia and Canada...
Graham: One very insightful commentator pointed out an indisputable truth. Whether the world is cooling or warming, the effect is not going to be globally negative in every part of the world. If you can’t agree so far it indicates that your brain is starved of oxygen and need medical help....
Ed Shearon: Wouldn’t be doing my job unless I pointed out that the summary of this story is completely wrong: 1) No “US schools” called for anything. 2) The lower house (what an understatement) of the State of South Dakota passed a non-binding resolution “urgingR...
ADE: I see the British Council for Green Morons is well represented in the European effort to extract taxes. http://british council
DougS: Mad Mads has got a blurb on the linked website, viz. “We need major companies to come up with new ideas how to save the climate”… ;eh? – that’s a new one, ’save the climate’! Well I suppose it makes a change from ’saving the planet’....
mike t: The guy looks like he’s had a few months taking crack cocaine! Considering the crap he’s spouting he probably has been .
James: A friend of mine believes that while there has been a decline over the last 8 years (against an otherwise upward trend, and still above the longer term average) that the rest of the science is so well supported that deniers are just jumping on a rather insignificant fact when faced by the...
John O'Sullivan: James, defamation laws require the allegedly defamed to file suit.I’ve called them out but unless they file their cause of action there’s nothing more I can do other than repeat my allegations that they are crooks. If they don’t mind their characters being...
James: but your happy trying to “tempt just one of these alarmists fraudsters to sue me – I’d really love to fight them in court. Just like Monckton Ive called them every variation on the term for ‘fraudster, crook, liar’ etc. but still no takers. Wonder why? ; )” Why don’t you...
Dave N: I totally agree with Mr Nelson regarding the informal stuff. Now, can he tell me how it applies to the climategate emails, of which most, if not all, were directly related to their activities in the CRU etc, and directly to their publicly paid professions? I’m sure the Team will be...
Ed Shearon: Graham: Morris dancing? I suspect you’d be far more suited to it than I given your obsession with spinning.
Graham: Okay so it’s using the same basis as the IPCC who double counted and deleted contrary views from their report, yet still ocunted them as having peer reviewed grey literature. You can’t peer review grey literature. If it were all made up it would still only leave it on a par...
val majkus: and here’s a copy of my comment Well I read Mr Williams’ rather hysterical piece and what struck me is how he referred to denialists as ‘the voices of the extreme’ when I would say the opposite is the case; the ‘voices of the extreme’ are the warmists and they are the ones who...
gimply: It suddenly struck me that AGW alarmists might be genuinely suffering from FEAR. Irrational, to be sure, but they feel it as real Either that or they were weaned too soon after birth….
Graham: From May 2008 With the world teetering on the edge of a full-blown food crisis, it may be time to cut back on biofuel, said Barack Obama yesterday. In an interview on NBC’s Meet the Press, the Democratic presidential candidate said “there’s no doubt that biofuels may be...
Peter: Yeah and Climate Change is causing Human Mutations (Headline at the New York Times – dated June 11, 2011.
JD: I am right behind you on that one. I am sometimes amazed at what is expected. Great site and well done, JD.
kate: Ooooh, a new tax. would you like ice with that. http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/worldnew s/europe/spain/74014 22/Barcelona-hit-wit h-heaviest-snowfall- in-25-years.html
Henry chance: Wazzup? Temps are falling Snow is falling Sierra Club memberships are falling at a dangerous rate.
Graham: I don’t need to be convinced val. In the UK our politicians have disgraced themselves with the corruption over their expenses scandal and it seems that scientists are no better. I am just amazed that the three most senior UK scientific figures speak such clear lies on TV, in the...
val majkus: Graham if you like I could post my list of grey material
Bilbo Baggins: —–> Its A SCAM <—— …….. We in the U.K Know' (as its been on the news) ….THE U.E.A are funding the INQUIRY. What 'independence&# 039; ,they're your EMPLOYERS! ….Dont be fooled! foul play prt III http://blogs.natu...
TRACY: BOYCOTT HOLLYWOOD ! DONT GO TO THE MOVIES ! RENT THE MOVIES AT REDBOX OR EQUIV. THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY MADE HOLLYWOOD , NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND !
Minister for Truth: What a load of driveling hypocritical nonsense. Whats the bet they all arrived in gas guzzling stretch limos and private aircraft and live in house 1000 times too big for them chewing up power at a rate 10000 times greater than the average, for even America. When such serious...
Rathtyen: The applicable phrase is “lack of basic quarantine procedures”. Its pretty much as simple as that. Whether it was brought in, or has been periodically wiping out isolated toad populations for yonks, the problem was the chytrid fungus was spread from colony to colony, and then around the...
bilbo baggins: problems afoot in the shire! …not only false weather is dire. MET OFFICE problems too you see,… ‘too’ many false predictions & dropped by the BBC! Most of the ‘Hobbits’ ; are up in arms!…. all those fibs of the planet warms. The...
Graham: At least wooden windmills milled grain. The modern ones don’t even produce sufficient electricity to power a bread maker. I suggest that they get turned into fairground rides in the future, though as they’ll only work on windy days, maybe that won’t work either....
Ed Shearon: Just had a horrible thought. Perhaps you believe Christopher Booker is a credible critic of energy policy precisely because you agree with him that tobacco and asbestos are not harmful to health. I mean, after all, look at your graphics and your headlines. This is the fringe...
DougS: I despair – surely there’s someone at the CEGB that realises that we’re heading for disaster if we place any sort of reliance on stupidly expensive, inefficient and unreliable kit like photo-voltaics and WTG’s. Perhaps they’re not allowed to speak up for fear...
Malcolm Shykles: The quantity of CO2 in the atmospehere is dependant on the rate of evaporation of the oceans. We cannot control it. “Thus, the observed global warming on the Earth is not caused by human-induced greenhouse gases emission, but mostly by unusually high intensity of the solar...
Denis Ables: http://joannenova.co m.au/2010/03/the-cli mate-industry-wall-o f-money/ Jo Nova (a really credible website) speaks not only about “following the money”, but also other relevant issues.
Lisa.M: Hey Graham dont forget India in the Obama Green stimulus package: $90 million in stimulus money for MADE IN INDIA wind Turbines. http://bungalowbills cw.blogspot.com/2010 /03/carnahan-wind-fa rms-robin-carnahans. html Now the stimulus money is supposed to create American jobs. It’s...
Tim: Judas Gore has the inexperienced ear of Obama in his pocket.
paua: One of my more quality blog posts concerned that very picture, see it here: http://thedailysuppo sitory.blogspot.com/ 2009/10/tangent-of-e pic-proportions.html And keep up the good work over here at Climategate.com!
Squidly: I think the most important line in that whole email is that last one (bold is mine): I want the NAS to be a transformational agent in America This is a HUGE red flag for me. Paul Falkowski is a “progressive&# 8221;. Make no mistake about this. This one sentence tells me loud and...
Ahrvid Engholm: These are pictures from the Baltic Sea, during this passing weekend. To give some info (I’m Swedish, so we have the info – it has been high-profile news) something like 40 ships have been stuck in the ice in the waters outside Stockholm. And further north, the port...
val majkus: ABC The Drum are today running an article by Climate change reporting: balanced or biased? By Jonathan Holmes http://www.abc.net.a u/news/stories/2010/ 03/04/2835977.htm?si te=thedrum all informed science skeptics who watch the ABC please visit and leave a comment
val majkus: while you’re at that site don’t forget to read the essay by Marc Hendricks – both are brilliant
Blogger TonyN at Harmless Sky has written up something I think you all should go take a look at. He’s done a very interesting analysis of the latest IPPC Assessment Report and has come up with some important questions, and invites others to help him answer them. It’s not your usual science debunking piece.
Europeans have long traded excessive taxation for being taken care of by the government. But I have a feeling that they too, like us Americans, are at a tipping point. Damn the growing evidence that climate science hasn’t been so scientific, the EU is about to get hit with their first “federal” tax under the pretext of saving the planet for our children.
Britain is facing many problems, not the least of which is meeting its energy needs in the coming years. Christopher Booker of the Telegraph UK looks at Britain’s nonsensical energy policy. He questions how his country will be able to avert its looming shortage of energy, with 40% of their generating capacity set to disappear in the coming years as they close 14 major nuclear and coal-fired power stations.
