’so what happened to the drought Mr Tim Flannery and the AGW? Maybe should give back the prize… LOL’

Vincent You may still have a drought, but can’t see it due to all the water….LOL

“OT but important.

Since I work for the government and know what unfathomable damage the EPA can inflict if CO2 is classed as a pollutant ( Director Bremby of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment has already denied a new coal power plant in Holcomb based on CO2 as a pollutant), I have wanted to comment on the ANPR to EPA but felt somewhat intimidated by the Physics. If any of you feel the same way, perhaps this could be the avenue to vent your disapproval. Available at this website,

http://sepp.org/Archive/weekwas/2008/Nov_15_2008.htm”

Tim, Joseph D’Aleo has published this about the same subject:
You can download two PDF files with his complete response to EPA.
HE NOT ONLY ANSWERS THE QUESTIONS BUT ALSO QUESTIONS THE QUESTIONS!

Nov 15, 2008
EPA and ANPR Deadline for Comments is November 28, 2008

By Joseph D’Aleo

The ANPR is one of the steps EPA has taken in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Massachusetts v. EPA. The Court found that the Clean Air Act authorizes EPA to regulate tailpipe greenhouse gas emissions if EPA determines they cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. The ANPR reflects the complexity and magnitude of the question of whether and how greenhouse gases could be effectively controlled under the Clean Air Act.

The document summarizes much of EPA’s work and lays out concerns raised by other federal agencies during their review of this work. EPA is publishing this notice at this time because it is impossible to simultaneously address all the agencies’ issues and respond to the agency�s legal obligations in a timely manner.

Key Issues for Discussion and Comment in the ANPR: Descriptions of key provisions and programs in the CAA, and advantages and disadvantages of regulating GHGs under those provisions; How a decision to regulate GHG emissions under one section of the CAA could or would lead to regulation of GHG emissions under other sections of the Act, including sections establishing permitting requirements for major stationary sources of air pollutants; Issues relevant for Congress to consider for possible future climate legislation and the potential for overlap between future legislation and regulation under the existing CAA; and, scientific information relevant to, and the issues raised by, an endangerment analysis.

EPA will accept public comment on the ANPR until November 28, 2008. See EPA ANPR for details and directions.

Earlier responses to the CCSP are supposed to be considered but it is a good idea to resubmit them to ANPR to play it safe. I have done so in two parts: Part I summarizing the 9 responses to the CCSP and a new one in Part II responding to these specific scientific questions the EPA is seeking input on:

(1). EPA seeks comment on the best available science for purposes of the endangerment discussion, and in particular on the use of the more recent findings of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program.

(2). EPA also invites comment on the extent to which it would be appropriate to use the most recent IPCC reports, including the chapters focusing on North America, and the U.S. government Climate Change Science Program synthesis reports as scientific assessments that could serve as an important source or as the primary basis for the Agency�s issuance of �air quality criteria.�

(3). EPA requests comments as well as the adequacy of the available scientific literature [synthesis reports such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fourth Assessment Report and various reports of the US Climate Change Science Program]

(4). The Endangerment Technical Support Document provides evidence that the U.S. and the rest of the world are experiencing effects from climate change now.

The window will close on comments November 28, 2008 and decisions will be made that we may have to live with for a long time. We can only do our best to ensure we have a say and maybe some influence on those decisions. Though the responses I sent were relatively long, they need not be. Short pithy comments that address one or more of the questions with relevant documentation to papers and peer review or just data can be just as if not more effective. Thank you for whatever you do.

See: http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/Global_Warming_Politics/A_Hot_Topic_Blog/Entries/2008/11/18_Predictions_Off_Piste.html

Global Cooling is Here
Evidence for Predicting Global Cooling for the Next Three Decades
by Prof. Don J. Easterbrook
Global warming (i.e, the warming since 1977) is over. The minute increase of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere (0.008%) was not the cause of the warming—it was a continuation of natural cycles that occurred over the past 500 years.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10783

No need to post this to your blog. Not sure how else to get the info to you.
It may not fit into this item either. Just an FYI.
BTW – Your recent info on the Russian Temp anomalies is very interesting.
Congratulations on the great work you are doing.

You may find the info at the link below to be interesting, as I did.
Based upon the 800,000 yr Ice Core record, they find an interesting Iron-CO2 link:

4. the concentrations of CO2 have depended on the amounts of iron in dust,
with higher availability of iron resulting in lower amounts of atmospheric CO2

Two-Mile-Deep Antarctic Ice Core Reveals Stupidity of AGW Catastrophism
16 11 2008

The extraordinary conclusions of the Epica 2008 “Quaternary Climate” scientific conference in Venice (Nov 10-13, Venice, Italy) have elicited little interest in the media.

http://tinyurl.com/6ry72x

Planet may get too hot for tropical insects, warn scientists
Joshua Tewksbury, assistant professor of biology at the University of Washington, said: “What we found was that if we use climate models to move the climate forward and ask how are they going to do in the future, the insects living in the tropics are already living in climates that are quite warm compared to what they want to live in.

Unlike temperate areas such as the UK, where there are more defined seasons, there is little way insects can escape the heat in tropical regions by adapting.

“If you warm up a tropical rain forest by 4C, it’s warmed up all year long, so there’s no way they can hide,” Prof Tewksbury explained.

“There’s a lack of seasonabilty so there’s no way they can adapt to live in the spring.”

And unlike warm-blooded animals, cold-blooded organisms cannot regulate their body temperatures by growing a fur coat when it is cold, or shedding it when it gets warm.

They are limited to seeking shade when it is too hot or burrowing into the soil. If it is still too hot in the shade they will not be able to survive.

http://news.scotsman.com/scitech/Planet-may–get-too.4055448.jp

http://omniclimate.wordpress.com/2008/11/16/two-mile-deep-antarctic-ice-core-reveals-stupidity-of-agw-catastrophism/

“If Iceland’s glaciers melt, sea level will rise 200 feet.” LOL!!

This was posted yesterday. Apparently now water vapor is the main cause of global warming and it amplifies the effects of Co2 :( sheesh.

As a proud member of the Surface Stations Team, concentrating my efforts in the remotest parts of Oregon (so far, I’ve captured only Paisley; Anthony beat me to Bly), I thought last Memorial Day I would make a significant contribution by capturing the station next to the spectacular Wheeler County Courthouse in Fossil, only to find it apparently is not on the USHCN list. What a disappointment!!!

So, what’s up with that, anyhow? I’ve got beautiful pix and no place to post them!!!

Anyhow, now that gas prices have dropped, I won’t be so reluctant to fire up the SUV and head across the Cascades to such garden spots as Moro, Condon, and Hermiston. Gotta do what I can to shake off this global winter . . . .

Number Of The Beast; 666

clear:
6….. protons
6 …. neutrons
6 ….electrons

naturally: CARBON

FM