“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.
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.
@ur momisugly 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.