Meanwhile NASA GISS scientist Lacis, who was highly critical of the chapter 9 executive summary draft says that:
I am actually encouraged by the all criticisms that the IPCC AR4 report is receiving.
He makes some valid points and provides insight into the review process. More in comments at Andrew Revkin’s NYT Dot Earth blog here
From the Australian, news on that IPCC “overhaul” in Nature:
Scientists say IPCC should be overhauled or scrapped
INTERNATIONAL scientists have called for the world’s peak climate change body to be revamped or scrapped after damaging controversies that have dogged the expert panel in recent months.
The scientists suggest a range of options, from tightening the selection of lead authors and contributors to the International Panel on Climate Change, to dumping it in favour of a small permanent body, or even turning the whole climate science assessment process into a moderated “living” Wikipedia-IPCC.
Writing today in the journal Nature, five US, British, German and Swiss climate scientists – all contributing or lead IPCC report authors – agreed a mechanism for assessing the facts and impacts of climate change was critical.
But they acknowledged that calls for reform had intensified after what Nature called “recent furores”. Last month, for instance, it was revealed that flawed communication between teams of scientists led to the IPCC’s inaccurate claim that most Himalayan glaciers would melt almost 300 years earlier than forecast. In November, the release of hacked email messages between climate scientists triggered widespread media reports of scientific wrongdoing.
According to Mike Hulme, from Britain’s University of East Anglia, the structure and process of the IPCC has passed its sell-by date. “The IPCC is no longer fit for the purpose,” he wrote in Nature.
In Australia, Barry Brook, the director of climate change research at Adelaide University, agreed, saying: “I wouldn’t be disturbed if there wasn’t ever another IPCC report, provided we replaced it with something more timely, concise and relevant to policy makers,” he said.
Full story at the Australian here
Pamela,
OOPS! just saw the double entendre there – no play on your name intended. You do make me think…
Mike
@ur momisugly John from MN
Thanks for the link and laught – didn’t know I was “Anti-Science” until now… is that better or worse than being a “denier”?
😛
I’d be wary of a Wikipedia type IPCC when Wikipedia itself seems to have a very warmist bias. The page on the MWP has some dodgy graphs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period
The hot air has gone out of the IPCC balloon and it is falling fast from grace. My major concern is that the premise that trace amounts of CO2 produces a catastrophic change in climate is not dead yet. As a result, while IPCC lies under the bus, the planet’s politicians will climb on board the bus but will still control the research purse strings and will find another coalition of scientists that are willing to conduct research to show that CO2 is a dangerous pollutant that dooms the planet and therefore must be controlled by selling, buying and trading carbon credits. Destroying IPCC does not change the political situation that led to the collapse of IPCC. However, we know their tactics and we will be watching.
Hey, we can’t be having any Gray fog! It’s evidence of CO2! Water Vapor Feedback! Global warming! Tipping points! etc, etc, etc.
A little detail about me. I talk a lot. Therefor I could be adding to the CO2 problem. My one and only squeeze would say this about my causing global warming by talking too much, “ayauuup”.
OT We need an article on this one… from the USA Today
Could chicken manure help curb climate change?
WARDENSVILLE, W.Va. — Here’s a low-cost solution to global warming: chicken manure.
At Josh Frye’s poultry farm in West Virginia, the chicken waste is fed into a large, experimental incinerating machine. Out comes a charcoal-like substance known as “biochar” — which is not only an excellent fertilizer, but also helps keep carbon in the soil instead of letting it escape into the atmosphere, where it acts as a greenhouse gas.
Former vice president and environmental advocate Al Gore calls biochar “one of the most exciting new strategies” available to stop climate change. For Frye, it means that, before long, “the chicken poop could be worth more than the chickens themselves.”
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/environment/2010-02-10-cheap-carbon_N.htm?csp=34&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo
Tom G(ologist) (20:01:36)
The problem with all these magazines of science is that they have whole heartedly published a great deal of the garbage science as science. It is set up that a panel of their piers looks to see if the theory is somewhat credible.
This leaves real science in limbo of who looks at it really objectively.
I have many times come across physicists who have missed massive chunks of actual physical science that our planet has changed in the last 50 years except they know that the ice is melting and the climate is warming. NASA is of absolutely no help as they have created a totally enclosed system that any new science is potentially conflicting with the current research so you’ll never find a person who will talk or help.
Ruth Curry’s work is pivotal in understanding how an Ice Age is occurring. Along with a great deal of physical evidence shows that the additional pressure build-up in our atmosphere is the cause. This additional pressure is hard to measure as rotation is pushed it up into the atmosphere but look how pretty our higher mountain sides are getting.
Sorry Pamela,
I have the opposite problem…too many beans.
davidmhoffer.
Correct your first sentence to read…’cannot CONTROL climate’ and your post makes even more sense than otherwise (although I think that that is what your really meant). Your thought about ‘living in bubbles’ makes me think of an Earth which is uninhabitable except outside the bubbles. In reality, we should be thinking that any marginal increase in temperature should be an opportunity. It is not inconceivable that there could be a mass migration of people to Africa to take advantage of the new opportunities there. Is that idea impossible to conceive of? May it not be true that, as a result of ‘warming’, more rain might fall on Africa? Who knows?
This thought only reinforces my idea that the Peers of the Realm do not know what they are talking about, eminent scientists or not. Or, they may be corrupt.
Mike D.
The publications that you should be referring to are ‘The Sun’ and ‘The Star’. The publication ‘Nature’ is obviously just another ‘tits and bums’ publication.
Joe.
The oceans are the key. For billions of years, the oceans have been ‘pulling’ on the moon. That is why why the moon always shows the same face to us and spins only once a month. The oceans are vast beyond imagining and have enormous power. The oceans will absorb any surplus CO2 and splash it about and re-emit it, and sink it, or whatever. Do you know that if you stood the whole human population of the world side by side, we would all fit onto the Isle of Man, give or take a bit? I say this only to illustrate the minimal nature of the effect we have on the World.
The last thing that I have to say is this. It is a well known scientific fact that the mere burning of fossil fuels, in itself, does not necessarily warm the atmosphere. Any scientist with knowledge of history will know that, as regards the steam engine (railway trains to me and you), clever engineers and scientists worked out how best to convert the heat of steam into motion.
Extrapolating from this idea, it is not true that aircraft burning ‘oil’ (aviation fuel) significantly heat the atmosphere – almost all the heat is converted to motion. This is not an easy concept, and I stand to be corrected. I really, really, really wish that a scientist would correct me, if I am wrong.
Finally, for some reason that I do not understand, REAL scientists (people who experiment) are not allowed to speak. Only those who say what the government want them to say get funding. THAT IS THE FACT.
Michael J. Bentley (20:07:50) :
Pamela,
“… I’ve seen these folks in action, and they, sorry to say, sometimes move the corporate machine further than those who stand up and take the bullet. Both are needed, but these folks deserve credit too.
I wish the world were a little more black and white. The grey fogs my vision.”
—…—…—
An excellent science fiction writer (I believe, but am not certain) named Micheal Stackpole once had his character explain “The Gray Fallacy” this way:
“If one side claims something is white, and the other side claims it is black, then the public tends to believe that both are somewhat correct and its real color is actually gray.
It might actually be gray; but if the enemy is lying, the object will always remain white. Regardless of what “everybody” thinks, the object will still be pure white.”
Junican said: “Extrapolating from this idea, it is not true that aircraft burning ‘oil’ (aviation fuel) significantly heat the atmosphere – almost all the heat is converted to motion”.
Okay, so then what becomes of that energy?
Christopher K (15:01:35) :
Before any consideration of the continuation of the IPCC we first need to redo very carefully the temperature indices maintained by NOAA and afilliates, GISS, CRU and the Hadley Centre, which have all been shown to be hopelessly corrupt.
Even the satellite based series are corrupted by the fact that they had to be calibrated using GISS and/or HadCRUT.
Is this true that the satellite data has been calibrated using GISS and or Hadcrut?
I thought I read they were calibrated in a lab before launch. Either way, the data cannot be relied upon, as the satellite sensors can’t only detect the SST signal, detect the heat from the whole troposphere. To get round this problem the scientists have to program the hardware to only look for what they think the frequencies/signal should be and then measure the difference from what they expect it to be. So a few assumptions there. See posts by D. Ch. (13:11:08) and George E. Smith (15:10:38) and vigilantfish (17:36:24) on
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/05/spencer-record-january-warmth-is-mostly-sea/ Doesn’t this issue deserve more investigation?
Very appropriate illustration (of course!), just the locomotive for tight turns or even three-point turns such as on the Darjeeling Himalayan Railway.
http://www.dhrs.org/index.htm
IPCC (Intergovernmental Partnership of Cargo Cultists)
From that font of all knowledge, Wikipedia: Cargo_cult_science:
Cargo cult science is a term used by physicist Richard Feynman during his commencement address at the California Institute of Technology, United States, in 1974 to describe work that has the semblance of being scientific, but is missing “a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty”.
Feynman cautions that “We’ve learned from experience that the truth will come out. Other experimenters will repeat your experiment and find out whether you were wrong or right. Nature’s phenomena will agree or they’ll disagree with your theory. And, although you may gain some temporary fame and excitement, you will not gain a good reputation as a scientist if you haven’t tried to be very careful in this kind of work. And it’s this type of integrity, this kind of care not to fool yourself, that is missing to a large extent in much of the research in cargo cult science.”
Junican (20:57:06)
The oceans are the key. For billions of years, the oceans have been pulling on the moon.
The planet has been pulling on the moon. The density of the oceans is greater than the land and is flexible to disruptions. This also gives us our wobble.
Most of your science is correct. Man contributed to the hastening of our current situation but the planet has a cycle. When the plant life and animal life are at there peek of giving off energy and gases a protection mechanism kicks in to protect water from mass evaporation.
This is salinity changes. The unique thing that happens is that it starts on the surface on the oceans. If it was started in all the oceans would mean a heavy evaporation had occurred to concentrate salt. By starting on the surface to a few inches would suggest atmospheric intervention.
The area science totally forgot was rotation. The pulling of salt to the surface.
Our atmosphere is elastistic and can stretch to a point as colder layer block from moving higher making the atmosphere more dense. Changing the speed of the atmosphere being pulled along.
What real damage we have done to the planet is the total removal of water from the biosphere cycle. Putting thousands of billions of gallons of water deep into the planet for the pressure to pump oil.
All the surface trappings we do with water is interfering and holding water from it’s natural evaporation cycle. This is only a minor irritant to the vast amounts still left. We as a species can do some serious damage if gone on for an extended time.
Oliver K. Manuel (13:54:15) :
************************
I would add National Geographic to the list. As late as last week, Google was still running their advertisement here with “proof” that AGW is a clear and present danger.
The individuals that run these organizations have been lying to their constituencies. If they believed the AGW hoax, then they have been gullible fools. If they did not believe the hoax and repeated it anyway, then they have been worse than fools.
In either case, they have betrayed the trust of their constituencies.
I personally will not trust them again. I may be just a red neck rube but I am not a fool.
Regards,
Steamboat Jack
@Junican (18:19:10) :
“In the Daily Telegraph (England) today, sixteen peers in the House of Lords published a letter in the letters column. …. It is amazing that sixteen Peers of the Realm cannot see this.”
Not when you realise that the lords are all placemen whose continued acceptance, gravy train membership, social status etc., depends heavily upon toeing the line.
Quote:
“…flawed communication between teams of scientists…..”
End Quote.
Well that’s rather polite way to put it.
Nobody was lying, nobody was corrupt, nobody was playing politics with science, nobody was perpetrating a fraud. It was all an honest mistake and not their fault.
Why don’t they say “fraud” when they mean “Fraud”?
To judge from some of the dicey articles it has published recently, doesn’t Nature itself need an overhaul?
They are obviously trying to find a way to retell the LIE, to adjust it, fix it and concot a new fairy tale aimed at the simple people (the majority) of the earth, then scare them to death and conveniently prepare the next mexican jamboree.
No way!. Make sufficient stocks of feathers and tar (a fossil fuel). Russian hackers has been put in alert too.
Buy more popcorn!
Error: “Russian hacker HAVE been…
Joe (03:56:01) : Are you the Seattle Indian who wrote a letter to President Franklin Pierce in 1855?
http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1985/spring/chief-seattle.html
Stories like this will appeal to the naive sentiment of people to support their money making and seeking power agenda which is behind all this.
As George Carlin would put it:
When we ask ourselves Why am I here and what for am I here, God responds from above: Plastic! (to make plastic)
and:
“Oh Beautiful for smoggy skies, insecticided grain,
For strip-mined mountain’s majesty above the asphalt plain.
America, America, man sheds his waste on thee,
And hides the pines with billboard signs, from sea to oily sea.” ☺
Read more: http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/george-carlin-environmental-quotes-460608#ixzz0fF4ghlMc
JonesII (07:19:36),
That kind of propaganda irks me. The U.S. is one of the cleanest, most pollution-free countries on Earth, if not the cleanest.
Billboards have been illegal in most places in the U.S. for decades [the ones you see are grandfathered]. Strip mining must be covered and replanted when the mining is done. Insecticides are tightly regulated by the FDA; but if you want worm-eaten apples and packages of rice complete with dead insects, go to your grungy natural food store, they have ’em at premium prices. And fully one-third of the smog on the West Coast comes straight from China – which is certainly responsible for a major portion of the ocean’s pollution.
Smokey (07:47:38) :
So clean…but not enough yet. You gotto clean more jobs out from the market and reach higher than 20%, like ecologically friendly Spain has done with all their windmills and all Brussels ISO’s. Happily BROKE! they have changed the old good spanish wines for a better drink: Kool-Aid.☺
Have you realized that all greenies, ecologists, gobal warmers, climate changers, world government promoters, UN officials, and all of the kind, DO NOT really work?
However they gather in paradise islands where all of them arrive in private planes and now are planning their next jamboree in Mexico, perhaps because there they will easily find a product of their daily consumption (or rather absorption?), and I am not thinking of any “tamales” or “tortillas” but something more expensive which provokes some nice fights among “cartels” down there.
This substance is the main inspirer for their deep studies on climate science, as recently shown in Climate Gate.