I surveyed 5 NOAA USHCN stations today, 2 water plants, 1 sewage treatment plant, and two private observers. Total distance traveled: 376 miles.
All stations had MMTS, and were CRN 3,4,5 rated. The sewage treatment plant was a real gem. Mold on the sensor. MMTS was mounted about 18 feet from an open sewer inlet. I have all the yucky pictures.
Total CO2 footprint contributed by travel today: I have no idea, but still less than Al Gore’s.
I still have a week to go. I need a stiff drink. Jeez bought me one.
UPDATE TO THE UPDATE: Had that stiff drink, and washed the smell of today off myself. I don’t have the full survey report done, but gotta love those USHCN official climate stations at sewage plants. This one passed the smell test.
Click for larger image
Soylent Green is made from people!
Click for larger image if you dare.
Guess what, more of this tomorrow!
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
No warming for 10 years….poor temp measurements as highlighted by this site….NASA re-instate the wrong data sheet after the Y2k scare (scam?)…oceans cooling last 5 years…and….
Aqua satellite put up in 2002 to back the “warmers” evidently supports the sceptics.
Water vapour from CO2 forms clouds at low levels and thus becomes low cloud..which means it helps to cool the planet. Right?
In other words the Hadley Cente has screwed up and no hot spots in the Troposphere (wherever that is).
I feel better now!
Wonder why all those very clever journalists are having trouble understanding all this..seems fairly straightforward to me.
Has anyone told big AL?
I am sure he would appreciate knowing the truth…inconvenient or otherwise.
James,
Hasse@Noeway
Check out National Center for Policy Analysis (non-profit, bipartisen group). This may help you fight the madness.
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st308
Off topic I know, but I was told that Mann’s original hockey stick paper in Nature was not peer reviewed. Is this correct and can that be referenced?
Anthony: You needn’t post this as a comment. I just needed a way to get in touch with you!
I’m working on an article for a national publication that is targeted at law/technology. I’ve written for the pub a number of times over the last several years on technology topics, but a recent request for “green” articles caused me to fire off a anti-AGW rant to the editor, who then offered me the opp. to write a counter-AGW article. I did that, only to be shotgunned by an assoc. editor who obviously is drinking all the cool aid. I need some help on identifying some credible data sources for some of the underlying data that you’ve so nicely highlighted here.
Would you be interested in assisting me with this? I’ve also enlisted the help of Dr. Timothy Ball as another resource to review my facts. Any help you’d be willing to provide will be greatly appreciated. E-mail me at the address above.
Thanks!
-Loren
The Posthumous Luger, Newt’s decided more or less “If we can’t beat them-or make them listen to reason-we might as well join them and make sure they don’t do too much harm.” Which is not to bad in my view, if a bit defeatist and depressing. Well, it might not matter so much what you do if you do it the right way. Trouble is, if you naively believe what you are doing will make a difference when it won’t, you will do unnecessary harm no matter how careful you are. Possibly worse, though, is that if Newt doesn’t actually believe in what he is asking the people to buy into, he will have trouble making them listen-and I sense that deep down, he has doubts. But he also wants to be careful, meaning he has fallen victim to the Precautionary Principle.
Robert (18:15):
Technically, the Mann papers were peer-reviewed, but it is painfully clear that none of the reviewers ever really checked any of his sources or his analysis. To this day, Mann has not provided all of the data needed for a proper review. It literally took an act of Congress to get him to release some of his data and computer code.
Too often, peer review means somebody sitting down on the sofa on a Sunday night while the spouse is watching Desperate Housewives or Sunday Night Football, and giving the paper a quick read-through.
Has anyone told big AL?
He has a “need not to know”.
(If he did, can you imagine the legal trouble he would be in considering his business interests?)
the Troposphere (wherever that is)
That’s where we live and breathe.
we might as well join them and make sure they don’t do too much harm
Dubya, too, unfortunately. OTOH, he seems to be wisely) kicking the can down the road and making them “goals” not “mandates”–and if temps have not warmed substantially by then, those “goals” will be by the boards.
I will further observe that this-here “Precautionary Principle” is starving babies even as we sit here twiddling our keyboards. Maddens me just thinking about it.
The politics of “global warming” are all about politics, not solving global warming.
Every politician promises to “solve” the problem if you will give him/her to unconditional support (and money). But when you get into the details, step 1 always seems to be “appoint a committee to determine how to solve global warming”, which is the same thing that they have been doing over and over for the last 6 years. Why?
THERE IS NO POLITICALLY ACCEPTABLE WAY TO ‘SOLVE GLOBAL WARMING’!
The studies agree that to ‘solve global warming’ require massive reductions in CO2 emissions by >70% by 2050. No study has come up with a way to accomplish this using available technology without massive involuntary population cuts (i.e. genocide).
So it does not really matter if global warming exists, because nothing will be done to stop it.
please consider switching off the self referential ‘snap shots’ on your photos. it is distracting and a bit frustrating.
thanks.
REPLY: Actually you can do that yourself, just click on the little gear icon when the window opens
[I]I will further observe that this-here “Precautionary Principle” is starving babies even as we sit here twiddling our keyboards. Maddens me just thinking about it.[/I]
Well, the problem is that avg. Joe has been told that making emission cuts are a good thing, because they do no harm none the less. All he has to do is to make a small sacrifice. To pollute less is a good thing. Not to do this is selfish. blah blah blah. As he is an illiterate when it comes to science, it all makes sense.
What the alarmist try to do is to claim moral superiority over realists to more easily convince the public.
Here is the news flash. A small step like bio fuel, starve the poorest people in the world. Therefore, they should ask themselves how much bio fuels cuts emissions vs. how many they help starve to death. The only demand the EU has to bio fuels is that it cuts emission by 35% compared to fossil fuels!! Increasing food prices is like pebbles to me. But, for those millions getting by on less then a dollar a year, a giant rock smacked in the face.
Maybe every sceptical site on the web should add a donate button for an organisation like “Sceptics against genocide” and kick the alarmist loons of their moral high horse. Open peoples eyes, that these decisions have real consequenses
This scam is a crime against humanity…
RE: Norway – here would be an archetypal area for well heeled Norwegian “intellectuals:”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holmenkollen
It is superficially reminiscent of Palo Alto (CA) or Lexington (MA).
Now, I would ask any denizen of this fine suburb … have you canceled your snow removal service?
As he is an illiterate when it comes to science, it all makes sense.
Well, demographics are my back. And these bozos have Pascal’s conundrum turned on its head. You are so totally dead-on about biofuels. And lord knows how many would die as a result of a bloodstained a Kyoto-equivalent.
This scam is a crime against humanity
I think they really believe those things they believe. But I heartily agree with your sentiments. It’s high time the so-called liberals of this world remembered what the word “liberal” actually means!
Skeptics against genocide. I like it.
I have some ideas.
Re Steve Sadlov
They have “very likely” canceled their snow removaL. This area can be compared to bel air and they all probably have installed electric heating in their drive ways 😉
Electric driveway heating? Is that in any way common? (I wonder what THAT would do to microwave reflections.)
So we update our temperature monitoring stations and note anomalies over time but our country has a rather small global footprint to compare with the rest of the world’s land masses and oceans and then does the accuracy of the anomalies we measure become authenticated by agreement with trends in satellite data? There never has been a true global temperature base line for comparison and only relative changes have been noted that appear to follow certain repeating cycles e.g., sunspots.