“Cold Showers, Rotting Food, the Lights, Then Dancing” – Title of Pachauri’s next novel maybe?
WUWT commenter “Galileonardo” writes:
I found this reference to the New York Times in WGII 14.4.6. Just thought it should be part of the growing record:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch14s14-4-6.html
The reference reads (Wilgoren and Roane, 1999) and is the source for the following claim:
Unreliable electric power, as in minority neighbourhoods during the New York heatwave of 1999, can amplify concerns about health and environmental justice.
The AR4 reference page can be found here:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch14s14-references.html
It reads:
Wilgoren, J. and K.R. Roane, 1999: Cold Showers, Rotting Food, the Lights, Then Dancing. New York Times, A1. July 8, 1999
That article can be found here:
I’m not sure who peer reviewed it.
Lord Monckton will have a field day.
It’s amazing none of these dodgy references were spotted before. I suppose it’s a form of tipping point and the point has well and truly tipped.
Ed Begley? Care to comment?
OT
More corruption of peer review uncovered similar tacticts to those used by CRU?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8490291.stm
My gate, for the day…
Jessop, B., 2002: Globalization and the national state. Paradigm Lost: State Theory Reconsidered, S. Aronowitz and P. Bratsis, Eds., University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 185-220.
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch11s11-references.html
This is a book, I looked it up on Amazon.
http://www.amazon.com/Paradigm-Lost-State-Theory-Reconsidered/dp/0816632944
Book description:
“With increasing globalization, the meaning and role of the nation-state are in flux. At the same time, state theory, which might help to explain such a trend, has fallen victim to the general decline of radical movements, particularly the crisis in Marxism. This volume seeks to enrich and complicate current political debates by bringing state theory back to the fore and assessing its relevance to the social phenomena and thought of our day. Throughout, it becomes clear that, whether confronting the challenges of postmodern and neo-institutionalist theory or the crisis of the welfare state and globalization, state theory still has great analytical and strategic value. ”
Global warming or marxism? Your choice…
Re: Ed Begley
At least he acts the way he talks. I have to admire someone like that, even when he is incorrect.
Unlike, say ALGORE, John Travolta…
Anthony, at the rate these disclosures are coming to the fore, you may have to consider a separate site just to contain them all … and for ease of reference 🙂
I know I posted this in another thread, many disclosures ago, but I think it bears repeating. [From the Bagla’s extended interview with Pachauri]
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/327/5965/510/DC1
“[…]I mean, let’s face it, that the whole subject of climate change having become so important is largely driven by the work of the IPCC. If the IPCC wasn’t there, why would anyone be worried about climate change?[…]“
The rate this is going, the work of the IPCC is “driving” climate change right off the rails – and into the ground. With any luck, we won’t have an IPCC, then no one will have to worry about climate change.
Andy Scrase: This book is written by academics and published by an university publisher – it probably qualifies as “peer reviewed”.
19 hours without electricity. Oh the humanity!
I recall five days melting in the dark after Hurricane Rita. No computer, and I knew only one tune on the piano.
I’m sorry, but IPCC AR4 is a piece of JUNK.
Gate de Jour submission for next time. It’s not a competition, I simply don’t know where to post it.
Palaeogate.
From the CRU emails:
……………………………………..
9/14/98 -0700, Jonathan T. Overpeck wrote:
>Hi Phil et al. – just read the Jones et al. Holocene paper (v. 8, p.
>456-471) and had a couple comments/questions….
Has anyone examined how a tree-ring recon degrades as a function of sample size back in time. I always see the quality of dendro recons cast as GREAT vs.other proxies (and they are) based on comparison with instrumental records. But, the dendro
records usually have the best sample replication in this same instrumental period, and then tail off back in time. For example, Brian’s Jasper recon has a sample depth of ca 28 trees in the last century, but drops off to ca. 5 in the 12th century and 1 (?) in the 11th century. The “quality” of the recon must degrade too?? In contrast, some non-dendro reconstructions may not verify as well as dendro vs the instrumental record, but they might not
degrade with time either since the sample density doesn’t change with time.
Thus, could it be that at some point back in time, the dendro records degrade to the same quality (or worse) than other proxies???
5) Talking specifically about Jasper, it is interesting that the 20th
century is as warm or warmer than everything in the last 1000 years EXCEPT before ca. 1110 AD. Since the sample depth before this time is 5 or less, how much faith should we put in those warmer than modern temps??
……………………………………………………
Then we have
From: “Raymond S. Bradley”
To: Frank Oldfield
Subject: Re: the ghost of futures past
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 08:57:19 -0400
Cc: alverson@xxxxxxxxx.xxx, jto@u.arizona.edu, k.briffa@xxxxxxxxx.xxx, mhughes@xxxxxxxxx.xxx, pedersen@xxxxxxxxx.xxx, whitlock@xxxxxxxxx.xxx, mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
But there are real questions to be asked of the paleo
reconstruction. First, I should point out that we calibrated versus
1902-1980, then “verified” the approach using an independent data set for 1854-1901. The results were good, giving me confidence that if we had a comparable proxy data set for post-1980 (we don’t!) our proxy-based reconstruction would capture that period well. Unfortunately, the proxy network we used has not been updated, and furthermore there are many/some/
tree ring sites where there has been a “decoupling” between the long-term relationship between climate and tree growth, so that things fall apart in recent decades….this makes it very difficult to demonstrate what I just claimed. We can only call on evidence from many other proxies for “unprecedented” states in recent years (e.g. glaciers, isotopes in tropical ice etc..).
……………………………….
Comment by me:
Given that this was known in 2000, how does one account for the dominance of dendrothermometry in the material forming the backbone of the 2007 IPCC report, with its 90% confidence that rising temperatures were from man-made causes? Further, how can a hockey stick be justified to have a flat and level handle?
The “divergence” problem was known then, but it had disappeared from the agenda between 2000 and the 2005-7 period when papers were written for the 2007 IPCC. There was then and is not now, an explanation for the breakdown of proxies or the divergence post-1980 that makes calibration of dendrothermometery so incomplete and questionable.
If you take out dendro work and put proper uncertainties around other proxies, there is just no way to conclude that there were or were not hotter periods a thousand years ago, apart from the preserved written records and direct observations. So is there global warming, yes or no?
Even by 2005, some experts were still saying that the older record was not settled.
………………………………………….
From: Jonathan Overpeck
To: k.briffa@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: Fwd: Re: [Wg1-ar4-ch06] IPCC last 2000 years data
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 21:52:47 -0700
Cc: Eystein Jansen , cddhr@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
The biggest problem with what appears here is in the handling of the greater variability found in some reconstructions, and the whole discussion of the ‘hockey stick’.
The tone is defensive, and worse, it both minimizes and avoids the problems. We should clearly say (e.g., page 12 middle paragraph) that there are substantial uncertainties that remain concerning the degree of variability – warming prior to 12K BP, and cooling during the LIA, due primarily to the use of paleo-indicators of uncertain applicability, and the lack of global (especially tropical) data. Attempting to avoid such statements will just cause more problems.
In addition, some of the comments are probably wrong – the warm-season bias (p.12) should if anything produce less variability, since warm seasons (at least in GCMs) feature smaller climate changes than cold seasons. The discussion of uncertainties in tree ring reconstructions should be direct, not referred to other references – it’s important for this document. How the long-term growth is factored in/out should be mentioned as a prime problem. The lack of tropical data – a few corals prior to 1700 – has got to be discussed.
………………………………………………….
In summary, a neutral observer could say there is global warming if you believe group A of scientists and questionable global warming if you believe Group B. In the end, group A shouts down group B.
This is not an acceptable scientific basis for the hypothesis of recent global warming. Warmer than what?
Other people who acted the way they talked: Thomas Torquemada, John Calvin, Vladimir Ulyanov (Lenin), Adolf Hitler, Osama bin Laden… Objects of admiration, all.
Crook you can bargain with. Fanatic will kill you, no matter what.
I like the one where “the open window near the fire escape made her too nervous to sleep”.
Lord Monckton will have a field day for sure on this.
Will like to see a summary of his tour in OZ as to my utter shame of some of my fellow countrymen, he has not been treated kindly by many sections of the MSM who I believed would at least give him a fair hearing. He has however been receiving standing ovations from live audiences. But it is the mass uneducated public that need to hear his views.
Peergate.
The extent and amount of corruption committed with the peer review process is now sufficient to be exposed as corruption, conspiracy and fraud in a court of law. Arrests please.
On Biased BBC blog there is a must read,it appears that the BBC pension fund administrators have tipped the BBC into global warming, in a sane world the BBC would implode,
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2010/02/fingers-in-pies.hyml
in the top 5 investors in the fund we have BP and Shell petroleum read why !
On Biased BBC blog there is a must read,it appears that the BBC pension fund administrators have tipped the BBC into global warming, in a sane world the BBC would implode,
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2010/02/fingers-in-pies.html
in the top 5 investors in the fund we have BP and Shell petroleum read why !
This is good too: Fitzharris, B.B., 2004: Possible impact of future climate change on seasonal snow of the Southern Alps of New Zealand. A Gaian World: Essays in Honour of Peter Holland, G. Kearsley and B. Fitzharris, Eds., Department of Geography, School of Social Science, University of Otago, Dunedin, 231-241d
…..Gaia rules you know…and just above in the reference list: Evans, K.L., C. Tyler, T.M. Blackburn and R.P. Duncan, 2003: Changes in the breeding biology of the welcome swallow (Hirundo tahitica) in New Zealand since colonisation. Emu, 103, 215-220….and just from use of words:
Dupont, A. and G. Pearman, 2006: Heating up the planet: climate change and security. Paper 12, Lowy Institute for International Policy. Longueville Media, 143 pp. http://www.lowyinstitute.org/PublicationGet…
It’s the shoemaker in Köpenick [1906] multiplied some billion times…
“Was nun, kleiner Mann” recommended reading Fallada wrote it…Goes for
myself too…I’ll be back…I hope…In Solna 35 days below zero C and counting…
The Seattle Times is also a reference at http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch14s14-references.html
Ecotretas
CO2 boosts tree growth shock! http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20100202/tuk-global-warming-boosts-tree-growth-dba1618.html
George Tetley (01:29:35) :
On Biased BBC blog there is a must read,it appears that the BBC pension fund administrators have tipped the BBC into global warming, in a sane world the BBC would implode,
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2010/02/fingers-in-pies.html
in the top 5 investors in the fund we have BP and Shell petroleum read why !
Wow!!
http://www.spsconferences.com/our_speakers.asp?spkid=386
Name
Peter Dunscombe
Title
Head of Pension Investments
Company
BBC Pension Trust Ltd
Biography
After reading Engineering and Economics at Oxford Peter joined a firm of Stockbrokers in the City to carry out economic and company research. In 1975 he joined the in-house investment management team at Imperial Group plc which was taken over by Hanson plc and then demerged into Imperial Tobacco Group plc. For the last 9 years Peter was joint managing director of the organisation. In 1999 the management of the Scheme was outsourced to external managers and Peter took a 9 month sabbatical. In 2000 he joined the BBC Pension Scheme to head up their small in-house team to oversee investment strategy and investment manager relationships. Over the last 9 years the Scheme has developed a significant exposure to alternative assets and has been active in the areas of responsible investing and climate change.
Tobacco you say? I thought it was the skeptics that worked for Tobacco?
The question is repeatedly asked “Why has no one spotted these before?”. I’d imagine that no one has ever read the bloody report, possibly due to life being too short. And, if the recently highlighted references are anything to go by, it is some sort of Marxist recruiting pamphlet.
I’d imagine that quite a few people are looking at it now, though. I am looking forward to more “gates”.
“Mike McMillan (01:03:06) :
19 hours without electricity. Oh the humanity!
I recall five days melting in the dark after Hurricane Rita. No computer, and I knew only one tune on the piano.”
I recall the ’70’s in the UK. We had weeks of rolling blackouts due to strikes, which eventually lead to the “Winter of Discontent”, and then Thatcher.
Now that is a power outage, man made of course. All before AGW scare, but all within the next ice age scare.
Thank crunchie for age old carbon storage devices (Coal and wood).
Interesting the Guardian article emphasized sea temps, now surface temps are largely discredited; but none of you visionaries can see where this is going, and it’s a travesty you can’t. After Climategate, Pachaurigate, Amazongate, we must surely be approaching Watergate.
Are all of these ‘-gates’ of late by WGII? Are any of them by other working groups? — John M Reynolds
Climategate
Pachaurigate
TERIgate
Hurricanegate
Disastergate
Glaciergate
Amazongate
NGOgate – including
…WWFgate
…NWFgate
…Greenpeacegate
…Magazinegate
…Thesisgate
…Newspapergate
Bootgate
Chinagate
And that’s just the short version. With so many sorry tales that keep emerging, we’ll need a scorecard just to keep track of all the insanity that keeps on being uncovered.
King of Cool (01:20:39)
Re: Moncktons Oz tour, some of our friends are now editing a dvd of the tour. Should be available soon. Keep you posted.
How difficult is it to go through the whole of AR4 making a list and ticking off the dodgy references one by one? someone has started the process on EUreferendum thread http://umbrellog.com/forum3/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=1008159
It really needs a team taking one chapter at a time and all the references going onto a common spread sheet.
Maybe someone is already doing this? Or people on this thread who would have the time and know how to push this forward? Or even employing someone to do it for a fee, presuming it is a drudge and can be done simply
You know what’s been happening here, don’t you? AR4 is the product of green advocacy. Advocacy groups are being cited in AR4, and advocacy groups have been cutting out newspaper reports, and trawling publications such as leisure magazines etc for articles written by sympathizers and ignorant writers that support their case, and then getting these written into AR4. I can well imagine heaps of cuttings by warmistas being handed over.
This makes AR4 look very shoddy. It shows both a laziness to do proper research into publications and a desire to ram in green advocacy. As I pointed out in my recent post http://buythetruth.wordpress.com/2010/01/26/un-ipcc-rotting-from-the-head-down/ , there is no doubt that the WWF ‘2035’ Glaciergate figure was known to be a lie as it had been exposed as a lie years beforehand, including in the peer-reviewed literature. AR4 is beginning to look like a document that was ghost written by warmistas. But since millions of dollars (in the EU at least) have been poured into advocacy groups like WWF it looks even more like that thesis you can pay someone else to write for you in the hope of conning the examiners.
As I’ve pointed out before, some people have got their sticky fingerprints all over the place – like the former Chief Executive of WWF in UK, now head of the UK Met Office, which produces the warmista reports that go out over the BBC, is involved in green taxation, and steering trillions into green ventures, and in monitoring compliance! Taken from an advocacy group, he is being used by the government to spread eco-imperialism from the inside.
http://buythetruth.wordpress.com/2009/08/24/eco-imperialism-every-environmentalists-dream/
“[…] environmental justice.” !??!?!!
Ohhh…. so taxing the snot out of CO2 will bring ‘environmental justice’ to one and all?
I don’t think so.
Looking more and more like AR4 is just based on wikipedia!
Let’s not go overboard. Let’s remember that AR4 allowed citations from the gray literature that were uncontroversial, or that weren’t the major or only citations for a major point. Citing from the NYT to support this uncontroversial point shouldn’t be objectionable:
Lord Stern rises, vampire-like from the dead, according to the London Evening Standard…
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23801316-tories-poach-gordon-browns-climate-adviser.do
Tories poach Gordon Brown’s climate adviser
02.02.10
One of Gordon Brown’s most influential environmental advisers is to assist a Conservative working group, Shadow chancellor George Osborne will announce today.
Lord Stern’s 2006 report for the Treasury on the economics of climate change was a key factor in the development of the Government’s approach to global warming and he is frequently cited by the Prime Minister as an authority on the need for action.
But the economist – ennobled by Mr Brown as a non-party peer in 2007 – will now advise the Tory working group on the creation of a Green Investment Bank to drive the development of climate-friendly technology.
His recruitment will be regarded as a coup by Conservative strategists, keen to burnish David Cameron’s green credentials.
In a speech understood to focus on the question of where Britain’s future economic growth will come from, Mr Osborne will today accuse the Labour government of failing to support green technology and leaving Britain “lagging behind” rivals in the field.
He will argue that a Green Investment Bank would consolidate government backing for low-carbon technology, currently dispersed between a number of different funds, and help lever in private capital. New green technologies represent an important new source of jobs, investment and enterprise for the UK as it emerges from recession, Mr Osborne will say.
With the UK taking a share of less than 5% of the three trillion-dollar (£1.9trn) global market for green goods and services – less than France, Germany, the US or Japan – there are many opportunities for new technology to provide work and prosperity for Britain, he will say.
Speaking at the British Museum in London, Mr Osborne will announce that leading business figures including Bob Wigley, chairman of Yell Group, have agreed to join the working group.
***************************************************************************
Notice there is no talk here of climate science in any form. It’s all about money, and that’s all it is.
PeerReviewGate
Today’s UK Guardian is suddenly printing some anti-IPCC truths, but laced with silly stuff from Fred Pearse, the journalist (often cited in Green stuff as a scientist) original writer of the article that ‘Glaciergate’ stemmed from and who quotes the authority of the very strident leader of the Canadian Green Party, who has accused all Canadians for their stupidity – not a great way to secure votes! An article from one of the Milliband brothers (no, not a new radio), Climate/Global Warming Minister who beseeches all his readers to ‘beware the siren call of climate sceptics’. How in a sensible world can one be sceptical about the concept of climate? The man is beyond stupid in this respect – must be terribly confusing from his perspective to be watching truth keep rolling right out into the open.
Well
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10…436 errors should not invalidate the entire report!Does the IPCC report in question state anything that’s true? I doubt it. It’s really up to someone or some group to take the battle to the courts and get some of the AGW alarmists at the IPCC behind bars. Until that happens, nothing will really change. In fact the AGW alarmists still have a good chance of winning thanks to the media.
Not sure how best to submit this to WUWT. Here is a from-scratch analysis of the NOAA temperature data, in an attempt to see what trend really exists. Seems to be nicely done, and full source-code is available (in a rather unusual language).
Interesting news article on the normaly very pro-AGW New Scientist website:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18457-water-vapour-worse-climate-change-villain-than-thought.html
Not only the quote of this article is ridiculing the report, the fact alone that unreliable power supply and health and environmental “justice” is entered into climate change arguing is sleeky. It doesn’t take too much imagination to figure that cold is a much bigger threat to health and well-being than a slight increase in average temperature, in particular as no evidence has been given that an increase of extreme events is the consequence of AGW. Securing power supply to the population is as critical with as it is without AGW.
This IPCC section contains another sentence that tells a lot on invalid reasoning: “Since most large North American cities are on tidewater, rivers or both, effects of climate change will likely include sea-level rise (SLR) and/or riverine flooding. ”
This is against all logic: the location of North American cities does not have any influence on Sea Level Rise nor on Riverine Flooding; this is straightforward absurd reasoning.
A valid but equally trivial argument would be that sea level rise and riverine flooding would affect many North American cities located on tidewater and rivers.
Looks impressive though, every other sentence referenced to a set of authors with a year to them.
Since we are seeing more and more notes regarding corrupted peer review, I am re-posting this item I mentioned in tips and hints a few days ago. It seems a pattern is developing and that corrupted peer review and poor ethics in science extends beyond the realm of climate science, and is slowly metastasizing cancer in our research establishment.
—————-
Not climate related but perhaps a sign of the times and a pervading problem with science practice in the developed world.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/01/28/antivaxxer-movement-leader-found-to-have-acted-unethically/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+BadAstronomyBlog+%28Bad+Astronomy%29
Larry
DonK31 (00:51:58) :
Re: Ed Begley
At least he acts the way he talks. I have to admire someone like that, even when he is incorrect.
I agree.
Begley is a loon, but he does walk the walk………………………
Somebody please put AR4 WG2 out of its misery. Not even Realclimate supports it much any longer.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/01/the-ipcc-is-not-infallible-shock/
in general, the science of climate impacts is less clear than the physical basis for climate change, and the literature is thinner, so there is necessarily more ambiguity in WG 2 statements
I say, ditch that part of the report altogether…
This was a great spot (Jason (00:45:55) 🙂
More corruption of peer review uncovered similar tacticts to those used by CRU?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8490291.stm
When has the BBC ever come close to an article such as this about climate science? Shame it wasn’t around before my recent appeal to the BBC Trust.
Leon Brozyna
You missed WTFgate. ☺
Clive
“It was a dark and stormy night”
Edward Bulwer-Lytton 1830
It’s bound to be in there somewhere.
Re: inversesquare (Feb 2 01:55),
Dunscombe could find himself in a very sticky situation, as trust law is onerous in the UK, and when the flaky “alternative” investments turn to dust, as they surely must, he will have lost a lot of public money pursuing his hobby. Personal surcharge, perhaps?
Leon Brozyna (02:21:10) :
Climategate
Pachaurigate
TERIgate
Hurricanegate
Disastergate
Glaciergate
Amazongate
NGOgate – including
…WWFgate
…NWFgate
…Greenpeacegate
…Magazinegate
…Thesisgate
…Newspapergate
Bootgate
Chinagate
And that’s just the short version. With so many sorry tales that keep emerging, we’ll need a scorecard just to keep track of all the insanity that keeps on being uncovered.
———————————————-
Actually, that’s a really useful list.
You know, if the science weren’t already settled, this list might have some people feeling a little uncomfortable….
@ H.R. (02:41:52) :
“[…] environmental justice.” !??!?!!
I know. I know. Those words this early in the morning . . . . had to reach for my meds.
” I recall five days melting in the dark after Hurricane Rita. No computer, and I knew only one tune on the piano.”
I can only hope that the ‘one tune’ was Beethoven’s __Fuer Elise__.
Leon Brozyna (02:21:10) :
IPCC AR4 is a sluicegate of revelations into backdoor deals
I may be a prole, but every time I sees the letters WWF, I think of the now defunct World Wrestling Federation.
Of course I would be the last to suggest an analogy between the validity of the IPCC process and the outcome of a match between Lou Ferrigno and Hulk Hogan.
Another referencing error in IPCC: Killer Trees!!! Caused by global warming!!!!
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2433&Itemid=76
The July 1999 outage in Manhattan was caused by a decaying infrastructure in NYC, and had nothing whatsoever to do with climate. **Three** separate panels and their reports came to that conclusion, and “climate change” was not even an issue. Apparently the IPCC created that theory completely out of thin air:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/26/nyregion/26network.html
David C. Flanagan, a spokesman for the Public Service Commission, said it was aware of the need for substantial upgrades in Con Edison’s transmission and distribution equipment. “Obviously the areas with the highest feeder-failure rates are of concern to us,” he said.
The 19-hour power failure in 1999, the last major neighborhood blackout in New York City, also affected an area that was known to have a high number of failures.
Con Ed’s annual reports for the five years before that blackout showed that the feeder cables in Manhattan north of 110th Street — covering Harlem, Washington Heights and Inwood — shut down 80 percent more often than the other networks in Manhattan.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D00E7DE153FF936A15754C0A9609C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2
Another focus of the inquiry will be Con Ed’s maintenance of its distribution equipment, a major theme of three reports prepared after the 1999 blackout.
One report, by a panel of three experts convened by Con Edison, said the utility needed to inspect manholes more frequently, improve how it predicts the effect of heat on power cables, and, when a cable burns out, speed its effort to find and fix the damage. A second report, by Mr. Spitzer’s office, found that many components of Con Edison’s distribution network were vulnerable to heat and that the utility ”did not take adequate steps to identify, repair and replace such components.”
Mr. Miksad said the company had increased inspection and maintenance since then, but he could not say by how much.
A third report, by the state’s Public Service Commission, recommended that Con Edison speed up its replacement of older cables and of the joints that connect old and new cables and that it improve monitoring of feeder cables. Each feeder cable has hundreds of parts, which are gradually replaced as they wear out.
@Zorro “Looking more and more like AR4 is just based on wikipedia!”
But at least Wikipedia has a rigorous (if sloppy and fractious) peer review process 😉
The Seattle Times reference (Welch 2006) is mentioned on 14.4.8, “While the season for transport by barge is likely to be extended, the season for ice roads will likely be compressed”, http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch14s14-4-8.html
This just in:
CNN) — Punxsutawney Phil, America’s most famous rodent prognosticator, saw his shadow Tuesday, signaling six more weeks of winter.
OT:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8490291.stm
Seems it’s common practice these days to hijack the peer review system.
The IPCC report is looking more like a sophomore’s essay than a scientific study—it seemed to grab any and all references without actually reading the documents to provide an appearance of in-depth research.
Wrong chapter. Try this:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch7s7-references.html
Numerous groundhogs declare the ending of winter. They of course are peer reviewed.
The IPCC seems more like the
National Weather Enquiror.
Environmental justice? Folks, I was part of the California rolling blackouts due to heat, lack of enough juice, and gaming by Enron. . . they rolled thru the middle-class and rich neighborhoods too. . .
How is this a dodgy reference?
Also, why does the original post include the sentence “Who peer reviewed it?” when we know not every reference in the IPCC report needed to be peer-reviewed?
“Social justice” — now there’s a scientific term.
Oops! Should have said “Environmental Justice”, not “Social Justice.”
Same thing, really.
Government/governments set up Charity/Quango’s, to report results government/governments want to hear.
This applies to the road safety partnerships I have to deal with.
Accident data at speed camera sites are used to justify more speed cameras.
A balloon on a stick would produce the same results as a speed camera (regression to the mean) and would cost less.
A balloon on a stick does not generate revenue though.Either for the government or the quangos they employ out of public funds.
Thus the circle is complete.
Ian (02:14:19) :
After Climategate, Pachaurigate, Amazongate, we must surely be approaching Watergate.
Re a “Watergate”: I believe that would refer to the non-sinking islands, or perhaps to the “Unsinkable” R. Pachuri.
Andy Scrase (00:46:43) :
…Global warming or marxism? Your choice…
No choice required. AGW fits the neo-Marxist agenda:
http://buythetruth.wordpress.com/2009/10/31/climate-change-and-the-death-of-science/
Garry (05:14:16) :
“The July 1999 outage in Manhattan was caused by a decaying infrastructure in NYC, and had nothing whatsoever to do with climate. **Three** separate panels and their reports came to that conclusion, and “climate change” was not even an issue. Apparently the IPCC created that theory completely out of thin air:”
The IPCC report says nothing about the blackout in the NY Times article being caused by climate change.
Quote:
Unreliable electric power, as in minority neighbourhoods during the New York heatwave of 1999, can amplify concerns about health and environmental justice.
You mean the kind of unreliable electric power supplied by wind turbines !!
Yup, let’s have lots more “Cold Showers and Rotting Food”. Let’s go Green – and cold and smelly.
.
Sorry for the OT, but this environmentalist video almost knocked me down from my chair:
:)))
Anthony, Comments on this work?
bradley13 (03:54:57) :
Not sure how best to submit this to WUWT. Here is a from-scratch analysis of the NOAA temperature data, in an attempt to see what trend really exists. Seems to be nicely done, and full source-code is available (in a rather unusual language)
Anthony,
The link did not copy and Paste here is the link
http://www.bestinclass.dk/index.php/2010/01/global-warming/
John
‘ “Social justice” — now there’s a scientific term.’
More like a redundant term. Justice is surely per se ‘social’, that is, it is concerned with the right ordering of relationships in a society. The two classical loci of an appeal to the virtue of justice are the legislative chamber and the courtroom. The ‘jus cuique’, roughly ‘to each his own’ is the beginning of any ‘theory’ of justice, pace the late John Rawls.
“one law for the lamb and the lion is tyrrany,” as William Blake observed.
>>>On Biased BBC blog there is a must read,it appears that
>>>the BBC pension fund administrators have tipped the BBC
>>>into global warming
>> http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2010/02/fingers-in-pies.html
Well let’s hope the BBC pension fund invests heavily in wind power – and loses its collective shirt when the grid disconnects this hugely unstable power-supply system.
.
“Punxsutawney Phil, America’s most famous rodent prognosticator, saw his shadow Tuesday, signaling six more weeks of winter.”
Looks like the old rodent has been checking out the precipitous descent of the Southern Oscillation Index in the last ten days. Such negative spikes in the SOI often, in winter, herald cold and stormy days ahead for the eastern U.S.
Also, the AO and NAO are projected to be deep into negative territory for most of February
FULL CIRCLE
NYSlimes reporter to AGW propagandist: “OK, let me see if I have this straight. I quote Frank, who cite’s Steve, who quotes from Jim’s report, who says Mark’s review is most up to date, in which he quotes Sam’s interview, in which he quotes our story?”
AGW propagandist: “Yes, that’s right. And the larger we make the circleS, and the more of them we make, the harder it will be for anyone to figure out what we’re doing until it’s too late.”
DonK31 (00:51:58) :
Re: Ed Begley
At least he acts the way he talks. I have to admire someone like that, even when he is incorrect.
Unlike, say ALGORE, John Travolta
Don’t get me started about Travolta and his toy jets….
Had the pleasure of cutting him off in the traffic pattern once…
How many times can someone say that there is a problem with this or that article or data, but it doesn’t affect the underlying premise, before it is obvious that it does affect the underlying premise?
“astateofdenmark (00:35:29) :
It’s amazing none of these dodgy references were spotted before. ”
The Globe was in a warming trend. Almost no one questions ‘confirmatory’ data.
Then comes along a particularly harsh winter in the Northern Hemisphere and people start trying to reconcile what their eyes and frozen backsides are telling them with what ‘Officialdom’ has been telling them.
We need a collective noun for all the gates. “A labyrinth of gates”? “An exposure of gates”? “A paddock of gates”? “A denouement of gates”?
Purchasing windmills sends a statement, a message of “social justice” even when they do not work.
Minnesota, eh?
http://kstp.com/news/stories/S1390565.shtml
The windmills just for show. It is too cold for them to work.
So apparently the IPCC perfoms no greater role than simply as “Asscociated Press” to the greater climate community (advocates, activists, scientists and journalists)?
I guess I always knew that, deep down.
“Mike McMillan (01:03:06) : 19 hours without electricity. Oh the humanity! I had to smile at this, it happens in rural America a few times every year. In the past ten years, time without electricity is usually less than a day in western Colorado 2-3 times annually. Prior to 2000 it was 1-4 days, whenever we had a heavy snow, but the network has been made more resilient these days.
>>ScientistForTruth (02:30:15) :
>>You know what’s been happening here, don’t you?
Yes, I do. AGW is about money and power. It’s always been about money and power.
There’s more science involved in the study of Big Foot than there is in this scam.
Vinceo (07:29:48) : We need a collective noun for all the gates. I submit:
“A Fence of Gates”. A couple of double entendres come to mind…
We will probably still hear the comment that the majority of the IPCC report is solid. It is interesting though that all the ‘mistakes’ seem to point one way. What’s the probability that 436 ‘random’ errors would all point in the direction of increasing alarm?
A-a-a-a-n-n-d, those hits just keep on rollin’!!
I wonder… did Buffy ever manage to slay that vampire?
Somebody associated with the IPCC has got to be embarrassed by it all.
And politicians have got to be getting tired of defending the indefensible.
This IPCC report fiasco has gotten way out of hand.
On the bright side: Now a brief and concise argument can be made to the neighbor across the backyard fence about why the supposed scientific basis of AGW is such a load of bull.
Thanks, IPCC, for making it so easy.
These absurd references are one thing. The harder part would be to go through all the prima facie appropriate references, to actual scientific papers, and find out to what extent they support the claims based on them. I suspect there’s a whole lot more funny business to be uncovered.
Better save a record of it before they delete it from the site!
Thread start was specifically on IPCC AR4 references, but since prefix was Gate Du Jour perhaps this will qualify as on-topic:
In the big scheme of things it may not be the lead headline, but:
To the long list of ClimateGate progeny that has been noted and expanded on by a number of recent WUWT comments I propose to add the following:
JunketGate; i.e.:
Came across several interesting online reports:
CBS News (how about that) reported that we the taxpayers spent $1.1 million sending 106 people including 21 Members of Congress to COP15. Per person cost for food & lodging EXCLUDING airfare for 15 (D) + 6 (R) Congressmen was $4,406 each. Congressional participants in this junket spent >$400K on hotel rooms, meeting rooms and $1,000-a-night hospitality suites.
Nothing like being able to go Cadillac and live it up on the taxpayer’s dime. . . . GRRR……
Just a couple of many online reports with more detail:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/25/cbsnews_investigates/main6140406.shtml
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/hotelcheckin/post/2010/01/congress-copenhagen-climate-summit/1
Andy Scrase:
I take it that Jessop 2002 is cited in the IPCC assessment, but I can’t find it on the link you show:
Is there a possible mistake here?
Meant to include the link:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch11s11-references.html
@bradley13 (03:54:57)
“Not sure how best to submit this to WUWT. Here is a from-scratch analysis of the NOAA temperature data, in an attempt to see what trend really exists. Seems to be nicely done, and full source-code is available (in a rather unusual language).”
That’s hilarious! Not sure which is funnier, the data analysis or the comments by the pro-AGW crowd. I would like to think their comments are tongue-in-cheek, but they are so humorless and dull that they don’t make good parodies. Could anyone really be that clueless?
Garry
“The IPCC report says nothing about the blackout in the NY Times article being caused by climate change.”
Right, but the fact this reference was in the IPCC report at all shows that they are meaning us to infer a link, surely? If so that is pretty underhand.
Hans Moleman (06:43:19) “The IPCC report says nothing about the blackout in the NY Times article being caused by climate change.”
AR4 unquestionably states that “unreliable power” is a secondary effect of climate change, and that is what caused the outage.
When in fact the NY Times articles I quoted – as well as the three official commission reports about the specific outage we are discussing – all make it perfectly and inarguably clear that the outage was caused solely by aging equipment, inadequate load planning, and deferred maintenance.
Andy Scrase:
I found it here:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch7s7-references.html
Science? IPCC AR4 wouldn’t know science if it was run over by it.
The IPCC wroking group is a bunch of comic book assemblers. It cannot be this bad by accident. The IPCC working group cannot be fixed. It must be disbanded. I see no reason to try again. It’s all a huge waste of money that could be used for drilling wells for people that have no clean water.
“Environmental Justice.”
What rubbish. I REALLY don’t think most people will buy such tripe.
Imagine the whoppers that will be delivered here.
I can’t quite find the words to describe such a complete disregard for the unraveling of AGW.
http://www.americanprogress.org/events/2010/02/climatescience.html/streaming.html
The Science of Climate Change
February 3, 2010, 12:00pm – 1:30pm
Watch this Event Live
About this Event
Due to high demand, we have reached capacity and the event is now closed. A live webstream will be available here. We apologize for any inconvenience.
An overwhelming quantity of direct observations and analyses published by scientists in various disciplines around the world demonstrates that human activity has warmed the planet and altered the climate. The severity of the projected impacts of continuing on our current greenhouse gas emissions path has only increased in recent years.
Most of the developing world deals with unreliable power. It’s really only here in the west where we get all “in a twist” when the lights go out.
Just got back from India where rolling blackouts are a normal thing in the middle of summer… or anytime it rains… or any time any of the sketchy components of the over-stressed grid get cranky.
Ironically, as most of us understand, it’s the enviro-nut policies that would only make this worse.
Vinceo (07:29:48) :
“We need a collective noun for all the gates. “A labyrinth of gates”? “An exposure of gates”? “A paddock of gates”? “A denouement of gates”?”
I love collective nouns! My favourite is a murder of crows.
Of gates?
A ‘Bill’? Too easy.
A ‘sweetness’?
A ‘condominium?’
A ‘toothpaste?’
A ‘radical?’
A ‘skeptic?’
A ‘denialist?’
The UEA just released a statement claiming that the climategate files were all together on a single server
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2010/02/02/uea-files-were-on-a-single-server/
Just found this email ….
To: Punxsutawney.Phil@xxxxxx.xxx
From: Phil.Jones@xxxxxxxxx.xx.xx
Subject: Hiding the shadow – Something to keep between us Phils
Phil –
It has been a while. I have been swamped with “climate gate” matters and FOI investigations but thought I’d drop you a note as you prepare for your annual appearance at Gobbler’s Knob.
You’d be doing me and my fellow climate scientists a great favour were you to come out this year and avoid seeing your shadow so that the media can report “More Signs of Global Warming”. Perhaps you could even do this whilst wearing some beach wear – a “mankini” perhaps.
Be a pal and hide the shadow.
Many thanks.
Phil
Marc Moreno on Alex Jones tv NASA Scientist demands end to industrial society and more!!!!!!!!
http://www.prisonplanet.com/marc-morano-on-alex-jones-tv-nasa-scientist-demands-end-to-industrial-society.html
Garry (08:27:04) :
“AR4 unquestionably states that “unreliable power” is a secondary effect of climate change, and that is what caused the outage.”
Wrong. It states “Climate change will likely lead to substantial increases in electricity demand for summer cooling in most North American cities” then later talks of the problem of unreliable electrical power when responding to summer heat demands, citing the NY Times article which covers exactly that. In your words: “the [1999] outage was caused solely by aging equipment, inadequate load planning, and deferred maintenance.”
Unreliable power is already a problem when responding to current summer heat demands. If summers get warmer, it’s likely that problem will only get worse.
Several Punxsutawney comments. Funny stuff. I found this reference in AR4. ☺
Phil, Punxsutawney, 2009. The decadal variability of winter duration in the Northern Hemisphere: Cause for concern. J. Rodent Sci.. 60, 131 – 148.
This story does remind me of the famous spoof of a New York Times headline:
“World Ends — Women, Minorities Hardest Hit”
Hans (08:55:06):
You just restated perfectly how power outages would be a secondary effect of climate change, thus making Garry’s point. (Not to mention that the whole chapter is on the subject of effects of climate change — if it is not a supposed effect of climate change, then it should not even be in the chapter.)
Curt (09:19:06) :
“You just restated perfectly how power outages would be a secondary effect of climate change, thus making Garry’s point. (Not to mention that the whole chapter is on the subject of effects of climate change — if it is not a supposed effect of climate change, then it should not even be in the chapter.)”
Garry’s point was that the IPCC said Climate Change will cause power outages (including the one in the Times article). They said no such thing.
NYC is a crowded place with infrastructure problems. To suspect that an increase of a couple of degrees in temperature will have an impact on failure rates is valid, and is a good premise to start a study. It appears they forgot the study part and jumped to the conclusions page. It’s starting to appear that this is normal for the IPCC.
Hans Moleman (09:45:41) :
Are you being deliberately obtuse? You keep making Garry’s point for him, then saying he’s wrong.
In a chapter on the effects of climate change, the IPCC states that climate change will increase electrical demand for cooling on very hot days (primary effect). This increased demand on very hot days increases the possibility of failures on electrical grids, particularly those with insufficient capacity and poor maintenance (secondary effect).
It’s actually a completely plausible claim — that isn’t the issue. As you said yourself, ” If summers get warmer, it’s likely that problem will only get worse.” The issue raised here is the citing of an anecdotal newspaper account as evidence in a supposed scientific document.
I don’t agree that imprisonment, or even a fine, is appropriate. Our focus should be on fixing the scientific process so that it it is more open and democratic and can’t be hijacked. (CAWG is only one instance of this — this emerging stem cell business is another.)
However, a commenter here a couple of months ago said something that was so clever that it deserves recycling: “Mann should go from Penn State to state pen.”
Not really. The NYT reference was only to support the very obvious point that lack of power leads to civil unrest by citing an instance of it. The NYT cite wasn’t used to support anything of a scientific nature.
Hi – I’ve linked to this post in my Top Tips for Tuesday – hope this is ok, please tell me if not.
http://draughtyoldfentales.blogspot.com/2010/02/tuesday-2-february.html
Alexander Feht (01:06:44) :
Other people who acted the way they talked: Thomas Torquemada, John Calvin, Vladimir Ulyanov (Lenin), Adolf Hitler, Osama bin Laden…
One possibly relevant correction, Alexander. OBL did not commit suicide in order to kill “infidels”, at least as far as we know, which is what he was telling his noble minions to do in order to avoid being an infidel themselves and meet with Allah and the Virgins. He’s more like a lot of the so called Environmentalists who don’t practice what they preach as a core “value” – or in many cases a full blown Cult fetish – but vilify everyone else including the only economic system that works, Capitalism, and offer us the Slavery of Communism or Fascism, a distinction without a difference, instead.
Don’t know if anyone looked at the IPCC Reference page, but just several lines above the citation to the NYTimes article is a reference to a Seattle Times article.
I tried the link but came up with nothing.
Welch, C., 2006: Sweeping change reshapes Arctic. The Seattle Times. Jan. 1 2006. [Accessed 12.02.07: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/ 2002714404_arctic01main.html
What civil unrest is there in that article? People bitching about loss of power?
@curt (10:28:17) & @Hans Moleman (09:45:41) : “The issue raised here is the citing of an anecdotal newspaper account as evidence in a supposed scientific document.”
Thanks Curt for the defense 🙂
The AR4 statetement is like asserting that “Some social justice advocates believe urban apartment fires are caused by rising global temperatures,” and then citing random NY Times articles about NY apartment fires to prove that those “social justice advocates” are right, and that global warming (rather than deferred oven cleaning) causes apartment fires.
Utterly ridiculous.
I’m a computer guy and not a scientist, but I can say that this is a false logical construct and most definitely it is not “science” except in the odd and whacky CRU/AR4/IPCC/Mann/Jones scientific modes of the 21st century.
The IPCC AR5 will reference to itself (i.e. IPCC AR4)…
@roger Knights (10:42:27) :”The NYT reference was only to support the very obvious point that lack of power leads to civil unrest by citing an instance of it.”
No.
The AR4 direct quote is: “Unreliable electric power, as in minority neighbourhoods during the New York heatwave of 1999, can amplify concerns about health and environmental justice (Wilgoren and Roane, 1999).”
In fact, “(Wilgoren and Roane, 1999)” is a NY Times newspaper article, which article provides no support or assertion or reporting of any kind whatsoever that anything (let alone “global warming”) is responsible for any event or factor relating to the July 1999 power outage.
The citation is completely bogus, used exclusively to support the author’s own point of view, and not only is that cite to an anecdotal newspaper account (not to any peer-reviewed science), but it’s also a cite to an account that doesn’t in any manner support or bolster the author’s assertion about “amplified concerns about… environmental justice.”
The citation would have been equally valid if had been to my grandmother’s recipe for fried chicken.
” The IPCC report says nothing about the blackout in the NY Times article being caused by climate change.”
Then what is the point of the citation?
“…the blackout in the NY Times article…’
You mean the article was censored?
I’ve run out of popcorn.
OT I suppose – a very silly satirical take on catastrophism, IPCC and climategate from a British blog. It was a nice light laugh after the day’s serious stuff on the topic. Quite plausible really, should be a doddle to model:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/environment/trees-will-not-become-unstoppable-killing-machines%2c-admit-climate-scientists-201002022433/
Please note the title of the book advertised on the upper right banner. Very British.
(!Ribald humour and ripe language for anyone of a squeamish disposition!)
The greatest concern regarding “unreliable power” would be ….. wind power.
Interesting take on things in the New Scientist editorial.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20527452.600-let-the-sunlight-in-on-climate-change.html
“However, the IPCC’s heroic days are probably over. The case for anthropogenic climate change has been established; the Nobel prize is won. So it is time for a rethink of where the IPCC is going, and what its future role should be. ”
Over to you folks…
The UEA fights back agains the Grauniad article which slated the lack of action regarding the UHI effects in China’s temperature figures:
http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/CRUstatements/guardianstatement
Richard Black rips the UEA ‘attack’ of the Grauniad article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/2010/02/much_has_been_written.html
I thought this was a spoof, please tell me it is a spoof:
The Social Simulation of the Public Perception
of Weather Events and their Effect upon
the Development of Belief in
Anthropogenic Climate Change
http://www.tyndall.uea.ac.uk/sites/default/files/wp58.pdf
@Andy Scrase
This Tyndall paper cannot be real, can it? Can it? And yet it’s on their site and 41 pages of sociological mind manipulation theory is hardly a one-liner gag. If it’s real, it’s straight out of an Orwellian nightmare and speaks volumes about the intentions of AGW proponents, as much as the CRU documents do. I remain sceptical on this file but … but ….
“Proposition 4. As positive temperatures accumulate, the general tendency towards
warming lessens the tendency for further warmer temperatures to have an impact on
belief in the occurrence of change. The perception of change is replaced by a perception of normality.”
“Figure 10. The Impact of Recurring Seasonal Deviations and Positive Temperature
Accumulation on the Media”
“Figure 11. The Relationship Between Spring Positive Temperature Frequency Media
Effect and Individual Belief Update.”
@RichieP
Well, I suppose if they can download a few emails, then uploading a hoax pdf shouldn’t be too much of a problem
We could always email the authors and ask them for verification.
Nah, this Tyndall paper has to be a trap set for credulous deniers to descend into conspiracy theory …
“Obviously influenced by the substantive issue, we have labelled the scale we use as belief temperature. We assume that events (direct and indirect encounters) provide the impetus for belief change. One should keep in mind, that although we are dealing with a public construction of reality, the reality per se has not yet manifest. The public are assessing clues to confirm the conclusions of science. In effect, it is the social construction of quasi-reality.”
@Andy Scrase
My previous posted before I saw your reply. Well, I shall (try to) read it fully despite the strangulated and execrable style. How did you find it?
@ Andy Scrase
Holy cr#p! That looks legit and could be the Orwellian ‘how-to’ manual these guys have been following! Did you see at the end where they list their partners?
”
The Tyndall Centre is a partnership of the following institutions:
University of East Anglia
UMIST
Southampton Oceanography Centre
University of Southampton
University of Cambridge
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology
SPRU – Science and Technology Policy Research (University of Sussex)
Institute for Transport Studies (University of Leeds)
Complex Systems Management Centre (Cranfield University)
Energy Research Unit (CLRC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory)
The Centre is core funded by the following organisations:
Natural Environmental Research Council (NERC)
Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)
UK Government Department of Trade and Industry (DTI)
”
http://www.tyndall.uea.ac.uk/sites/default/files/wp58.pdf
Anthony/Evan – this deserves an article or more! Wow.. just wow!
I’ve taken a copy for preservation.
Anthony – *if * it can be shown that this is a legitimate item from this outfit, it is, as Sydney S says, strong stuff (at least on first skimming). My immediate reaction is to wonder how this fits into warmist press release policy/announcements – though timing and managing your scare stories to coincide with suitable weather/climate events is hardly an eureka idea and isn’t too different from advertising practices.
@Sydney Skeptic
If it is a hoax, then it is very well done, and it made it onto the Tyndall web site.
I can’t find any links leading to this paper, which makes we think it is a hoax.
Either way, it is still a story, IMHO
I don’t see anything unusual about that article. It looks like most other material that I have seen from Social “Science” departments. Check out a few “top” papers at http://tinyurl.com/yfqnemc I especially marveled at the top paper in the humanities section that explores the legal implications of the word f**k.
The unique part of the article in question is its play on climate change as a way to get published. Or funded. It’s a sign that way too much money is available for anything mentioning climate.
Clive (08:57:17) :
Several Punxsutawney comments. Funny stuff. I found this reference in AR4. ☺
Phil, Punxsutawney, 2009. The decadal variability of winter duration in the Northern Hemisphere: Cause for concern. J. Rodent Sci.. 60, 131 – 148.
ROFLMAO
@RichieP et al
Oops, spoke too soon.
It’s linked to from Scientific Commons
http://en.scientificcommons.org/11532103
@DCC
I don’t see anything unusual about that article. It looks like most other material that I have seen from Social “Science” departments
….The penny drops with me, finally
Climate Science = Social Science
+
Social Science Science (Popper)
=> Climate Science Science
QED
I meant..(Damned html tag stripping)
@DCC
I don’t see anything unusual about that article. It looks like most other material that I have seen from Social “Science” departments
….The penny drops with me, finally
Climate Science = Social Science
+
Social Science != Science (Popper)
implies .. Climate Science != Science
QED
@Andy Scrase
Well, I think that set of logical steps probably demonstrates that the science is settled.
Just had one of the head honchos of the IPCC on Newsnight, BBC2 tonight (2 2 10), stating it’s OK to use newspaper articles and Government reports if peer-review doesn’t exist. What next for tomorrow? Comic books?
It might be worth dragging up every instance of the IPCC heads and global warmists citing the impeachable peer-review credentials of the IPCC reports. They’re contradicting today what they asserted as fact yesterday.
It’s crumbling
@ Andy Scrase
If it’s a hoax, then it’s a very well written and comprehensive hoax.
It’d be nice to check out the existence of that doc on archive.org or Google Cache.. or search for the ‘wp58.pdf’ to see if it exists elsewhere.
Yup. Google ‘wp58.pdf climate’ – there are a few links to that doc!
http://coloradoright.wordpress.com/2008/01/16/green-communism/
http://www.dougwils.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5130:Belay-My-Last&catid=105:global-swarming
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/07/18/flashbacksnow-in-buenos-aires-first-time-in-89-years/
Pachauri of ‘Policy Neutral’ IPCC Calls for ‘Grassroots Action’ in Response to Setbacks http://bit.ly/dDxZao
Curt (11:02:54) :
What civil unrest is there in that article? People bitching about loss of power?
Oops — sorry. I assumed that something similar to the earlier blackouts had happened.
Anyway, citing the NYT article was still OK, because all it was documenting was the bad social results from an intermittent-because-heat-stressed electrical supply. The IPCC wasn’t relying on it for its science.
This is just unbelievable:
“Pachauri writes with an undulating, syncopated style similar at times to Michner and Obianco. Prose unexpected from an railroad engineer that soars and whinnies like a young filly in the warm Savannah. Definitely out of the box and well worth a look at the local bookseller. Not for the faint of heart or groin.” Opionionated Press
A virtual smut conductor. Ignominious.
Sioned,
I had noted it above. The link is correct; you just have an extra space in it:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002714404_arctic01main.html
Anthony,
If there aren’t no more candidates, this might be today’s Gate du Jour. After all, ice trucking might be in danger, as the IPCC states in http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch14s14-4-8.html referencing this Seattle news.
“While the season for transport by barge is likely to be extended, the season for ice roads will likely be compressed ”
Ecotretas
On the subject of the wp58.pdf paper I have referenced in previous comments, I should acknowledge the blog where I found this:
“climate change and the death of science”
http://buythetruth.wordpress.com/2009/10/31/climate-change-and-the-death-of-science/
Key phrase “Post Normal Science”
Please read this.
Personally, I find this bastardisation of science for political agendas the most distressing aspect of this whole AGW story.
I am a Maths grad ( many years ago) , and “Climate Change Science” of the Tyndall variety (not to be confused with Climate Science, which uses thermometers as opposed to ‘social strategies’ – and good thermometers too I might add) as the absolute anathema of what I consider to be science.
“Post normal science” as per my previous comment.
There is a Wikipedia page on this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-normal_science
Excerpt: (warning – this is scary)
”
Because of this, advocates of post-normal science suggest that there must be an “extended peer community” consisting of all those affected by an issue who are prepared to enter into dialogue on it. They bring their “extended facts”, that will include local knowledge and materials not originally intended for publication such as leaked official information. There is a political case for this extension of the franchise of science; but Funtowicz and Ravetz also argue that this extension is necessary for assuring the quality of the process and of the product.
“
Garry (11:19:30) :
“No.
The AR4 direct quote is: “Unreliable electric power, as in minority neighbourhoods during the New York heatwave of 1999, can amplify concerns about health and environmental justice (Wilgoren and Roane, 1999).”
Right. Nothing about unreliable electrical power being linked to climate change.
“In fact, “(Wilgoren and Roane, 1999)” is a NY Times newspaper article, which article provides no support or assertion or reporting of any kind whatsoever that anything (let alone “global warming”) is responsible for any event or factor relating to the July 1999 power outage.”
The article records the accounts of several people caught in the 1999 heat wave. You’re right in that it doesn’t specifically give a cause for the 1999 blackout though I would expect a clear thinking person to be able to infer from the title “Aftermath of A Heatwave…” and the content of the article (the numerous accounts of people in the article discussing being without power) that there was a connection between the unexpected temperatures and the blackout.
“The citation is completely bogus, used exclusively to support the author’s own point of view, and not only is that cite to an anecdotal newspaper account (not to any peer-reviewed science), but it’s also a cite to an account that doesn’t in any manner support or bolster the author’s assertion about “amplified concerns about… environmental justice.””
I don’t see the need for a peer-reviewed scientific journal as a reference for a statement about the effect of unreliable power on a community. Were I to have reviewed this part of the report I would’ve requested an additional source that more clearly explains the connection between the blackout and the heatwave (such as: http://www.ag.ny.gov/media_center/2000/mar/mar09a_00.html), but I don’t see a problem using this article in a section of the IPCC report that is illustrating the effects of infrastructure breakdowns in a few cities. Spending a sentence looking at the citizens point-of-view seems reasonable to me.
@ Hans Moleman (06:29:02) : “I don’t see a problem using this article in a section of the IPCC report that is illustrating the effects of infrastructure breakdowns in a few cities.”
Hans, why do you think it’s pertinent or appropriate for a technical and scientific report allegedly about “climate change” to be discussing the travails of urban governance and urban infrastructure management?
Ya know, NY City also has problems with its snowplows and road equipment during the winter. The Central Park lawnmowers and paint sprayers sometimes don’t work in the spring. Potholes emerge on the streets after long seasons of freezing and cooling.
Why aren’t any of those “infrastructure breakdowns” discussed in AR4?
Garry (09:09:09) :
“Hans, why do you think it’s pertinent or appropriate for a technical and scientific report allegedly about “climate change” to be discussing the travails of urban governance and urban infrastructure management?”
The report is meant to cover many facets of climate change. In the IPCC’s own words (http://bit.ly/1cldLG): “…the IPCC prepares at regular intervals comprehensive Assessment Reports of scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant for the understanding of human induced climate change, potential impacts of climate change and options for mitigation and adaptation.”
This subject seems to fall within those guidelines.
“Ya know, NY City also has problems with its snowplows and road equipment during the winter. The Central Park lawnmowers and paint sprayers sometimes don’t work in the spring. Potholes emerge on the streets after long seasons of freezing and cooling.
Why aren’t any of those “infrastructure breakdowns” discussed in AR4?”
I don’t know.
@Hans Moleman (10:09:34) : “The report is meant to cover many facets of climate change.”
You seem to be missing the point.
The July 1999 NYC outage had nothing whatsoever to do with climate change, according to three reports by the NY Times and three reports from three NYC commissions of inquiry.
The IPCC is lying about this nonexistent and completely fabricated connection.
Donna Laframboise continued work on finding newspaper references with her post today:
http://nofrakkingconsensus.blogspot.com/2010/02/yes-virginia-climate-bible-relies-on.html
I hadn’t seen the WSJ references but had found the Nassau Guardian and Tribune source. Author Gail Woon is apparently Executive Director of EARTHCARE, another NGO.
To those of us who have seen the bias in the IPCC for years, it is not surprising that there are quite a few non-scientific citations in the IPCC reports. As we expect they all show support for the theory of anthroprogenic global warming.
We should explicitly point out clearly and often, the fact that all pseudo-scientific citations support AGW alone is proof of the bias in the report. If this was just sloppy reporting there would be citations from both the “skeptics” and the “science is settled” crowd in the report.
To the skeptics this goes without saying, but to openminded people who have gotten their info from the media this could really open their eyes to what is going on. It is proof that there is not just sloppy science, but that the entire IPCC has an agenda.
Adam in California
Sorry if this has already been picked up , but I wonder if many of the non-British readers realise the very very rude meaning of the words “gobbler’s knob”
in English (sic- I cannot speak for the Welsh , Scots or Irish) English?
Cannot say more – a certain snip!
Garry (12:27:19) :
“You seem to be missing the point.
The July 1999 NYC outage had nothing whatsoever to do with climate change, according to three reports by the NY Times and three reports from three NYC commissions of inquiry.”
You’re right, I really don’t get your point at all.
The IPCC report doesn’t say climate change caused the 1999 blackout, but since climate change is expected to increase temperatures they’re looking at historical examples of temperature increases to suggest what some effects of climate change might be.