UPDATE: Bumped, video of this interview is now available below.
I got late word tonight that Dr. Roger Pielke Senior, of the University of Colorado, will be a guest on the FoxBusiness News Channel Friday morning at 10AM EST (7AM PST).
He’ll be interviewed about current issues in climate science. Here’s channel numbers for cable and satellite services:
Cable Providers
Comcast (Digital) Channel 130
Comcast (Digital) Channel 958
Satellite Providers
DISH Channel 206
DIRECTV Channel 359
Sky Angel Channel 319
For cable TV locations in the USA see this interactive finder:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/channel_finder.html
============================================
here is the video of the interview:
just so u know:
24 Feb: Al Gore to come to Manila to speak on climate change
GMA News: SM Prime Holdings is bringing in former US Vice-President Al Gore to keynote a leadership conference where top Philippine leaders from the academe, business, government and nongovernment sectors to learn from the experience and expertise of global leaders.
To be held at the SMX Convention Center at the SM Mall of Asia Complex on April 30, the lecture will have Gore present an Asian version of An Inconvenient Truth, a multimedia presentation on the threat of climate change and solutions to global warming and the subject of the movie of the same title that has won critical and box-office acclaim.
http://www.gmanews.tv/story/184682/al-gore-to-come-to-manila-to-speak-on-climate-change
still trying to con the developing world!
Lukewarm to tepid, I say.
Need people to get up there and don’t hold it back:
“Viewers, you’re being HAD. You’re being LIED TO. This “man-made” climate crap is FRAUD. Your intuition has been tight all along – it IS nothing but junk based on even junkier junk science!
It’s time to bring the fraud gravy train to a SCREECHING HALT, and that time is right now.”
“”” stevengoddard (10:41:10) :
George E Smith,
Do you really think the Arctic is melting at minus 30C?
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php “””
Well I just read the numbers Steven; and if it doesn’t melt; what else could it do ? Too much to use up in Martinis.
Besides Steven I figure if anybody knows what’s happening up there, it is probably you. I was going by the JAXA numbers; but when I look at the DMI temperature graph, I can see why you might question my sanity.
” … Newton and Einstein that Gravity is much more linear than the unpredictable fluid systems with internal randomness and chaos aspects.”
The 3-body problem of Poisson’s equation (the Newtonian Field) is nonlinear as can be, and is where Poincare pretty much characterized “chaos” (though not formally).
The 2-body problem of the contracted Riemann tensor (the Relativistic Field) is non linear and not solvable. The perturbations of a single body in a central force Relativistic field (the field of planetary orbits) are not linear
Re: ChrisP (Feb 26 10:56),
According to the AGW undeniers and Al Gore, it’s not a theory but a fact.
The Drs. Pielke are gentlemen, and I highly respect their opinions. The science is not ‘settled,’ and their views may eventually become the norm, at which point, the science will still not be settled.
The noise-to-signal ratio in global temperature is gigantic and trends (if any) are impossible to detect, given a semi-chaotic oceanic heat-sink with periodicity, complex tradewind dynamics, plus tidal, orbital, and solar cyclic influences. There is much that we don’t know, and much that we think we know, isn’t true.
Ot but this is will break the camels back.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/memo/climatedata/uc3902.htm
You’ve probably heard anyway sure to a major posting
I thought that Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. did a great job in the short time available.
He came across as calm, knowledgeable and honest, which is pretty good going for a climate scientist!
His main message was that Tom Karl was the wrong man to lead Obama’s new climate centre, as he would stifle the freedom of the team to look at all aspects of the science.
He also indicated that reducing CO2 was not the answer and that the money would be better spent identifying areas of risk of drought, for example and spending money to mitigate the effects.
A sensible, solid performance I thought.
Have you noticed that they have appointed Jan Egeland to being the leader of the next IPCC, atleast this is how it is said in Norwegian here:
“Dette er en slags oppfølger til IPCC”
“This is a sort of sequel to the IPCC”
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=no&u=http://pub.tv2.no/dyn-nettavisen/printversion/article.jsp?id=2844670
Surely Egeland in this position is a catastrophe! We all remember this:
The first comprehensive report into the human cost of climate change warns the world is in the throes of a “silent crisis” that is killing 300,000 people each year.
More than 300 million people are already seriously affected by the gradual warming of the earth and that number is set to double by 2030, the report from the Global Humanitarian Forum warns.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/05/29/annan.climate.change.human/index.html
http://www.ghf-geneva.org/Portals/0/pdfs/2009forumreport.pdf
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=no&u=http://www.dn.no/klima/article1680078.ece
An American scientist comes with a devastating critique of the climate report, which concludes that climate change requires more than 300,000 lives annually.
The report was prepared by the Global Humanitarian Forum (GHF) and estimates that climate-related deaths will reach over half a million by 2030.
GHF is led by former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, and the board sits among other former UN emergency relief coordinator Jan Egeland.
Roger A. Pielke of the University of Colorado, however, strongly critical of the report. Pielke studying disaster trends and calls the report a methodologically shame. He argues that there is possible to separate the economic losses and deaths caused by anthropogenic climate change from other types of deaths.
– “The climate threat is an issue that must be taken seriously. Nevertheless, this report will create problems for the climate issue because it is full of errors, “said Pielke to The New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/science/earth…
Roger A. Pielke Jr., a political scientist at the University of Colorado, Boulder, who studies disaster trends, said the forums report was “a methodological embarrassment” because there was no way to distinguish deaths or economic losses related to human-driven global warming amid the much larger losses resulting from the growth in populations and economic development in vulnerable regions. Dr. Pielke said that “climate change is an important problem requiring our utmost attention.” But the report, he said, “will harm the cause for action on both climate change and disasters because it is so deeply flawed.”
In my my view this is a HUGE U turn
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/memo/climatedata/uc3902.htm
There is no way any of the MSN etc can cope with this one. I would say the IPCC and Penn and UEA are finito. Sounds exagerrated but the big boys have decided to get of the banwagon….
OT but mildly good news for us in the UK … Pravda GB is straining at stool
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100027663/bbc-tells-the-truth-shock-horror-iceberg-not-caused-by-global-warming/
“AGW sceptics are now connected globally. They know the websites to trust, they can draw on a huge team of specialists and experts, many of them better qualified than the scare-mongers in white coats. This network of sceptics has a global outreach far beyond the scope of the clapped-out BBC.”
Eh, sorry, I wasn’t all that impressed by this. Could have been done much better, IMHO.
And from the same Telegrah article:
“In itself, it is a very small victory for the truth; but its implications are enormous. It tells us the scam merchants are on the back foot; they are in retreat; it will still require trench warfare for years to dislodge them, but the tide has turned. Just one sentence, almost a throwaway line, in a news report, but it signals an awareness that we are on their case. The AGW hysterics have irretrievably lost the battle for public opinion and now it is time to peel their layers of fabrication and falsehood like an onion.”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100027663/bbc-tells-the-truth-shock-horror-iceberg-not-caused-by-global-warming/
previous should be “get off” apologies. The APS should/must withdraw its climate change statement immediately or lose further credibility.
Gary (13:14:01) : “Anthony and SurfaceStations.org make the news too: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/26/climate-data-compromised-by-heat-sources/
“Hey, ctm – This deserves it’s own thread.”
As does this, lo, these many months:
http://www.incredible.org.uk/apostrophell/guide.html
Brian G Valentine (13:28:31) :
I disagree. I think one reason people are becoming more complacent about AGW is they are getting tired of hearing strident politicians and activists being strident and not holding back.
All science is going to be taking a serious hit in the credibility department as the house of cards continues to fall. I don’t think it’s going to recover from scientists being opinionated jerks, it will take people who can explain what’s going on and why. There’s still a place for folks like Morano, but that’s in politics.
@JonesII (12:42:13)
“The trouble is that whales, as us humans, breath..”
Huh? – the Prince should know better than than support such evil creatures then 😉
http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/
Memorandum submitted by the Institute of Physics to the UK Parliament:
“1. The Institute is concerned that, unless the disclosed e-mails are proved to be forgeries or adaptations, worrying implications arise for the integrity of scientific research in this field and for the credibility of the scientific method as practised in this context.”
“2. The CRU e-mails as published on the internet provide prima facie evidence of determined and co-ordinated refusals to comply with honourable scientific traditions and freedom of information law.”
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/memo/climatedata/uc3902.htm
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2010/2/26/getting-out-of-hand-again.html
It’s Much Ado About Nothing insofar as any worries about CTM’s liability is concerned.
Before any action can be taken against anyone it is going to require proof which is beyond reasonable doubt that illegal entry was gained to the UEA server which held the data which was subsequently released onto the internet. No-one at the UAE seems to know where the original data was being held. Without this information any further enquiries by the Police are bound to be fruitless.
It is not even sure that the data was copied from a server owned and controlled by the UAE. If, as has been suggested, that the data and e-mail information was held on an FTP server which was outwith the control of the UAE then no illegal access can be considered.
My advice to CTM is to co-operate with the British law enforcement agency investigating this case but to take very good legal advice before sending them even one word attributable to you.
Oh! Bugger!
Wrong thread!
Would CTM or one of his compatriots remove my mistake from this thread and put it where it should be?
[No can do. You will have to re-post. Then we can delete your original. ~dbs, mod.]
“Stephan (13:47:53) :
In my my view this is a HUGE U turn
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/memo/climatedata/uc3902.htm
”
Looks like they take no prisoners:
“11. The first of the review’s terms of reference is limited to: “…manipulation or suppression of data which is at odds with acceptable scientific practice…” The term ‘acceptable’ is not defined and might better be replaced with ‘objective’.”
Uh-oh. When somebody arrives on the scene who talks and thinks like a Borg you know you’re in trouble…
British Physicists Society has broken ranks!!!
@ur momisugly Ric Werme
“There’s still a place for folks like Morano, but that’s in politics.”
And that’s exactly where the main battle has got to be fought and won: real science may triumph over junk science but the politicians won’t be bound by those principles. It will need streetfighters like Morano to slug it out with the pollys.
Re: Stephan (Feb 26 13:47),
In my my view this is a HUGE U turn
Thanks Stephan, I agree this appears to be the first recognised scientific body that has complained about the climate science machinations.
The fat is well and truly in the fire, cat amongst the pigeons, it has hit the fan