Last night I pointed out how NASA had quietly purged IPCC AR4 referenced glacier melting claims from its climate.nasa.gov website, especially since they upped the year from 2035 to 2030 on their own. Now Roger Pielke Jr. points out that another curious purge has been spotted:
Excerpts:
There is another important story in involving the Muir-Wood et al. 2006 paper that was misrepresented by the IPCC as showing a linkage between increasing temperatures and rising damages from extreme weather events. The Stern Review Report of the UK government also relied on that paper as the sole basis for its projections of increasing damage from extreme events. In fact as much as 40% of the Stern Reivew projections for the global costs of unmitigated climate change derive from its misuse of the Muir-Wood et al. paper.
…
As I was preparing this post, I accessed the Stern Review Report on the archive site of the UK government to capture an image of Table 5.2. Much to my surprise I learned that since the publication of my paper, Table 5.2 has mysteriously changed! Have a look at the figures below.
The figure immediately below shows Table 5.2 as it was originally published in the Stern Review (from a web archive in PDF), and I have circled in red the order-of-magnitude error in hurricane damage that I document in my paper (the values should instead by 10 times less).
Now, have a look at the figure below which shows Table 5.2 from the Stern Review Report as it now appears on the UK government archive (PDF), look carefully at the numbers circled in red:
There is no note, no acknowledgment, nothing indicating that the estimated damage for hurricanes was modified after publication by an order of magnitude. The report was quietly changed to make the error go away. Of course, even with the Table corrected, now the Stern Review math does not add up, as the total GDP impact from USA, UK and Europe does not come anywhere close to the 1% global total for developed country impacts (based on Muir-Wood), much less the higher values suggested as possible in the report’s text, underscoring a key point of my 2007 paper.
I’m betting that instituions around the world are working fast to distance themselves from some of the IPCC claims. We’ll likely see more of this.
This could be construed as “evidence tampering.”
@aelfrith
No, if that were my intention then I would have linked to Desmogblog or Climate Progress.
Oliver K. Manuel (13:33:27) :
Unfortunately, NAS, NASA and the Space Science Board (SSB) all need to be investigated.
I tried to warn them of this impending disaster on Thursday, June 26, 2008 at the NAS Building in Washington, DC.
Sir,
as much as I respect all your comments on this site, on this occasion I’m a tad upset with you this time.
Don’t leave us dangling with that last sentence!
Please, please, please. Tell us more:)
In the UK, when something serious goes wrong, then the press call for an independent enquiry, to discover the causes, the extent of the problem and to make recommendations to stop the error happening again. The most recent was the MPs expenses scandal.
This also happened in accounting post the scandals of the late 1980s (Post Robert Maxwell, Polly Peck etc.) and post Enron as well.
Yet the UN IPCC have not even launched an internal enquiry. Instead, Dr Pachauri saysit is an isolated incident. The AR4 is probably the most important report in human history. Yet no proper internal control procedures seem to be present.
Dr TG Watkins.
I rather think I will! I’ll direct the honourable members to this very URL.
PC said in part
” the British Government is actually trying to rewrite history instead?”
Try wondering about a UK Government when they do things like this……
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245705/Cover-claims-David-Kelly-post-mortem-set-stay-wraps-70-years.html
and this is in The Guardian !!
No need to print this just a small typo in your final paragraph that I assumed would have been picked up by now.
instituions
Would anybody want to play golf with these folks? Forget the scientific method, how about having some honor?
Chums,
Several weeks ago, before the big freeze here and before glaciergate, I thought I saw on the UK Royal Society website links to a page of specific climate events and natural disasters caused by AGW. This page doesn’t seem to exist any more. Perhaps it was just a dream. Did anyone else have the same dream?
DavidS
Dr.T G Watkins(Wales) (13:09:52) :
Phil Willis – chairman of the S & T Committee was reported in yesterday’s Daily Telegraph as saying in relation to the investigation into the “stolen” emails “There are (sic) a significant number of climate change deniers who are basically using the UEA emails to support the case [that} this is poor science. We do not believe this is healthy and therefore we want to call in the UEA so the public can see what they are saying.”
Now although the English leaves a lot to be desired, the one clear thing it is saying is that you are not going to get a fair and balanced hearing on anything pertaining to climate change from a committee with a chairman such as this.
For those of you who have not heard of this politician he is a Liberal Democrat MP (for non-British readers, the Lib Dems are the perennial 3rd party in British politics who seem to be taking an increasingly left wing stance). He studied History and Music at the City of Leeds and Carnegie College, qualifying as a teacher in 1963 from the University of Leeds Institute of Education.
So that makes him well qualified to pronounce on climate issues, doesn’t it?
Sorry to say, Dr Watkins, I think we would all be wasting out time if we expected to be able to change such entrenched views.
As a footnote the journo responsible for the article was Louise Gray.
Stern Review is as irrelevant regardless of the figures. Any prediction of the future is in the realms of fiction as it does not exist in any tangible or quantifiable sense. They might as well be using crystal balls and tarot cards.
TheSkyIsFalling (12:54:18) :
and
jorgekafkazar (12:58:17) :
“When World War II began, [Eric Arthur AKA George Orwell] rose to fight for the cause of freedom again, this time for England. He joined the Home Guard and worked for the BBC to compose and disseminate wartime propaganda. Orwell knew of what he spoke when he skewered propaganda in Animal Farm and 1984. Orwell based his satires not just on hearsay and research but also on personal experience; writing propaganda is said to have made him feel corrupt.”
http://www.gradesaver.com/author/george-orwell/
Yes, George Orwell certainly understood propaganda. And I believe that he would readily recognize what the IPCC and its allies in government and the MSM are attempting to foist upon the world.
Mike Ramsey
http://failinggracefully.com/
“The planet is getting hotter and more crowded, energy supplies may soon get tighter, and yet billions of people seem to want a consumer lifestyle that’s completely unsustainable. Things aren’t looking good.”
Each item mentioned by the affluent young white activist in Pakistan is wrong and thoroughly discredited by much more intelligent people like Michael Crichton and Norman Borlaug. Yet he calls for ‘global governance’. These rich white kids will continue to think government gets things right when government is typically the source of not only the problem but also of the paranoias and illusions of crisis.
have yor read this link from The Guardian??? http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/24/china-climate-change-adviser title: “Climate change: Chinese adviser calls for open mind on causes
China’s most senior negotiator on climate change says more research needed to establish whether warming is man-made
(…)most senior negotiator on climate change said today he was keeping an open mind on whether global warming was man-made or the result of natural cycles. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OT but any one notice that so far this year The Arctic Sea Ice extent growth is very slow and lagging behind the previous years? I wonder what could be the cause of this? Has there been a lot of ocean current turbulence and pattern changes (as far as wind, ocean current strength and extreme weather/storms) that could be causing this. I was hoping to see the same if not better sea ice extent this year as it was last year.
The IPCC and the WHO(The UN period) need to bark up some one elses Money Tree and leave the USA alone. These current un-coverings of scandels is proof enough they are up to no good.
Andrew30 (13:24:23) :
M. Simon (13:13:46) :
“He who controls the past controls the future.”
He who controls the present controls the past.
He who controls the carbon creds will be trying to sell them fast.
and now the bankers are seeing the light !
Much of this report is really quite amazing. Below is a very typical example.
Please note how the report is based on assumptions made by models, not on observations…
“Recent studies suggest a 2°C rise in global temperatures may lead to a 20% reduction in water availability and crop yields in southern Europe and a more erratic water supply in California, as the mountain snowpack melts by 25 – 40%.”
So what are the observations so far. A .6 C rise in global temp, corresponding with a 100PPM rise in atmospheric CO2 has produced no observable decrease in global rainfall. However there is an estimated 8% to 10% increase in natural vegetation, and an estimated 15% to 20% increase in crops grown for many food products (assuming other conditions such as water and ground cond. are the same) due soley to a 100 PPM increase in CO2.
The observations do not meet the models. The benefits of increasing CO2 are better then linear for each doubling up to over a 1000 PPM. The warming effect decreases exponentially with each doubling. Conclusion, “Its better then we thought”.
This is a habit of bureaucracies that must be crushed.
It can lead to Orwellian outcomes at worst, but is unethical if not acknowledged, to say the least.
Thank the gods for the Internet so these lies are no longer easily hidden.
Wait … shouldn’t we thank Al Gore for the Internet instead?
Almost every reported drought, as a sign of “end times” is in fact not historic, and correlates far better with ocean currrent and SST changes known to be cyclical in nature, then any correltations with CO2.
Remenber how Atlanta was in such a horrible drought due to “AGW, well now the reservoirs are doing quite well indeed.
In the meantime the Green nonsense continues:
http://www.heliogenic.net/2010/01/19/greenies-next-target-your-lawn/
Notice all the little children crying crocidile tears at Copenhagen. Some big bad James Hansen told them they would drown. They have to wear Underjams at night because they are scared.
Joe Romm shows pictures. Greenland is melting as are the glaciers. The glaciers in Libya are already gone.
The Maldives join Atlantis because conservatives invented cars and work for Big Bad Oil.
mandolinjon (13:31:53) :
Good work Roger. You have just pulled another card of their house of cards. Regards, Mandolinjon
Since ClimateGate (The CRUTape Letters 🙂 ) it’s been dominoes