Comments on: “Deep Cool” – the Mole within Hadley CRU

By: Pete N

Pete N — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:48:57 +0000

Hummmm it seems we have found one of the benefactors of global warming here that true
shoreliner11 Ehh! .

It’s a pity this global warming is going to turn round and issue a few wet kipper slaps before too long now as the facts come out that AGW should in fact be AGC cooling not warming .

And any how there is one thing that everyone but a few seems to sweep under the carpet the fact that this is a perfectly natural thing that happens every 10,000 or so years , Stop trying to extract profit from an natural occurance ( we have enough of that with people charging for natural gas )

By: David Ball

David Ball — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 01:35:21 +0000

Sorry, shoreliner11, it is you who have to produce evidence to support your failing theory. Competent people understand that the true driver(s) of climate are not fully understood. Anyone who tells you different is lying. AGW is failing on all fronts and you don’t have the guts to face up to that.

By: Shoreliner11

Shoreliner11 — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:45:04 +0000

LOL, I’ll be interested to see how this plays out. My predictions…you’re going to get your hands on some bit of obsolete data and then make egregious claims not founded by your newly acquired “hot” dataset.

But your whole “mole” at Hadley is a great news story to make it sound like scientists are dissenting from the status quo. Cling to whatever tendrils of evidence you can to support your preconceived thesis.

By: jerry.de

jerry.de — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 13:35:29 +0000

What’s missing here are some additional context facts; recognizing that the data are not UK data per se. Data from many countries has been collected and collated at the CRU (Univ. of East Anglia) and which feeds into some of the UK Met Office work. Some of this data were collected under the arrangement that the source data were not to be made public because of commercial or other interests. Outside of the USA this is quite common — that national meteorological services (tasked with maintaining a national observing system and archive) treat their data as a commercial product — and so they will not release it to just anyone. The fact that I and others think this is wrong and inhibits science is not the issue, the reality is that many countries are not willing to freely release their data. So the CRU and Met Office are between the rock and a hard place; publicize the data and risk ruining their relationships with the data sources, or hold onto the data so that they can keep the data stream flowing and be able to produce the valuable derivative products.

By: Richard S.

Richard S. — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:09:30 +0000

More Appell attacking skeptics

http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=3740

By: David Ball

David Ball — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 04:05:27 +0000

As of 10:03 MST, it has been posted. Perhaps there is hope yet.

By: David Ball

David Ball — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 03:51:59 +0000

Gene Nemetz (17:23:08) Done. Now let us see if they have the cobbles to post it. I will be very surprised if they do.

By: AnonyMoose

AnonyMoose — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 00:57:14 +0000

Barry R. (14:30:09) – Look further. U.S. growing regions were recently moved north. Just in time for farmers to complain how late the growing season has started.

By: Gene Nemetz

Gene Nemetz — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 00:29:47 +0000

REPLY: One need not worry about this, the source is indeed official. – Anthony

Then this really isn’t too good to be true?

By: Gene Nemetz

Gene Nemetz — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 00:23:08 +0000

David Ball (16:53:50) : David Appell tried to pull a fast one over on Anthony

There is a comment section under his article. You could remind him of that and let people know about it.

Just an idea.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=stumbling-over-data&posted=1#comments

By: P. Wilson

P. Wilson — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:52:14 +0000

“What is the temperature today?

Sorry, thats forbidden knowledge.

OK. What is the weather forecast tomorrow?

Sorry, we’re not authorised to say. It puts us at risk of breach of contract.”

Ok, this is a logical scenario if the logic the met office uses was applied to what they make available.. Yet clearly they don’t. yet they’re willing to tell us their erroneous or otherwise projected ever increasing temperatures for the next 100 years everywhere in the world.

By: Barry R.

Barry R. — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:30:09 +0000

This may be slightly OT, but has anyone checked out the freeze-frost records for the US and other countries? It seems to me that if we really are seeing significant warming it would be reflected in the records for first and last freezes and frosts. Those records are probably less likely to be politicized because (a) farmers and thus food supply depend on them, and (b) Incorrect info/manipulation is more easily detected. It either frosts/freezes or it doesn’t and if recording stations are routinely reporting frosts/freezes where the surrounding area isn’t getting them or the other way around, then farmers are more likely to notice/react.

I don’t know what the current state of freeze-frost records are, but a quick web search turned up this data set from the late 1980′s. There is also a bibliography that looks interesting.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/freezefrost/freezefrost.pdf

By: Indiana Bones

Indiana Bones — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:49:50 +0000

Tom in Florida (16:01:11) :

…but they knew that we knew that they knew so they sent good data, but we knew that they knew that we knew that they knew…

Which brings this series to mind…

http://www.leedberg.com/mad/spies/snowboom.gif

By: Bethany

Bethany — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:21:43 +0000

Although some might not be noticing, I have noticed several sites around the internet with mysterious blocks saying that they are unsafe. Especially ones that market organic foods as well as sites like yours that oppose much of the propoganda. I am curious if this is becoming more than a trend and is a concerted attack. Has anyone else had difficulties with sites?

By: SteveSadlov

SteveSadlov — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:44:54 +0000

With people in high places making serious proposals to do planetary scale geo engineering to “mitigate global warming,” any true environmentalist would have to question AGW Hysteria and where it is apparently leading. AGW Hysteria may be more of a threat, per se, to the environment than the worst industrial excesses of the 20th century, Within orgs that are generally biased in favor of “the environment” / deep ecology, it stands to figure that there must be individuals who see the ironic threat of AGW Hysteria and are now starting to spring into action.