Weekly climate and energy news roundup

Restoring the Scientific Method is the theme of the Sixth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC-6), Sponsored by the Heartland Institute. It will take place in Washington, DC from breakfast Thursday, June 30, to noon Friday, July 1, at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel. This event will be more modest than in the past, yet as informative and, perhaps, even more challenging to the orthodoxy.

Senator James Inhofe is the Keynote Speaker at the Thursday breakfast. Senator Inhofe, probably more than anyone, prevented the US Senate from adopting cap-and-trade. Other principal speakers include S. Fred Singer, Craig Idso, and Bob Carter – all major contributors to the NIPCC reports. Of course, SEPP is a co-sponsor. For the program please see:


To watch the program live go to:


– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Quote of the Week:

“…it was clear that the first and greatest need was to establish the facts of the past record of the natural climate in times before any side effects of human activities could well be important.” HH Lamb on establishing the Climatic Research Unit at University of East Anglia [H/t Tim Ball]

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Number of the Week: $106.8 Billion

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –


By Ken Haapala, Executive Vice President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

The Supreme Court released its decision on the lawsuit brought by various states, and others, against public utilities for emissions of carbon dioxide under the concept that carbon dioxide is a public nuisance. In a surprisingly strong 8 to 0 decision (one judge abstaining), the Court ruled against the plaintiffs (those who bring the suit) declaring that the courts are not the appropriate venue for regulating carbon dioxide, whereas the legislature and the properly empowered executive are.

This decision, with appropriate spins, gives something to everyone and nothing to all. Global warming activists and certain newspapers declared that it reinforced the EPA’s authority of regulating greenhouse gases [GHG] and demonstrated the need for EPA’s action. Others were relieved that the nuisance principle cannot be so broadened to apply to GHG. Even business newspapers were split on the issue, with the Investor’s Business Daily calling it a big win for the EPA and the expanding regulatory bureaucracies that are damaging the economy, while the Wall Street Journal pointed out that Federal courts lack the expertise and the resources to address such issues and that Congress never expressly granted to EPA the power to regulate carbon dioxide.

At this time, it is impossible to state what the effect will be on the litigation appealing EPA’s ruling that GHG, particularly carbon dioxide, endanger public health and the environment. No doubt, the new court ruling will increase the pressure on the Appeals Court that is now considering the litigation. Will the Appeals Court decide that EPA is properly empowered to regulate GHG and that its endangerment ruling is based on solid science? Or will it decide that EPA is not properly empowered and/or that it failed to perform the independent scientific analysis that was required to make the endangerment ruling?

Those, who are a bit optimistic that the new court ruling may slightly tilt against the EPA, point to several footnotes in the new ruling indicating the uncertainty of the science. Among other revelations is a footnote in the ruling referencing a cover story in the New York Times Magazine about Freeman Dyson, who is very skeptical that GHG emissions are causing unprecedented and dangerous global warming. The referenced article ran before Climategate. Clearly, the Court realizes that the science is not as well established as the alarmists, including the New York Times, have proclaimed.

Further, the court stated: “The Court, we caution, endorses no particular view of the complicated issues related to carbon dioxide emissions and climate change.” This statement is significantly different than the 2007 decision in which the Court ruled that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, based upon, in part, claims that it was causing dangerous global warming, in turn, it was causing sea levels to rise.

Whatever the outcome, no doubt the losing parties in the Appeals Court decision will appeal to the Supreme Court, which can decide whether or not it takes the case.


Sea Level Rise: The climate alarmists released another study claiming accelerating sea level rise. In a twist from past claims, many alarmists now claim that sea level rise is the major threat of global warming. The new study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS), was immediately greeted with comments on various blogs, pointing out the inadequacies of the study. As William Gray suggested in his article carried in TWTW last week, the internet blogs provide a more rigorous analysis of questionable climate science studies than the “peer review” process does. (Please note that the articles in the Proceedings are not necessarily rigorously peer reviewed.)

Among the many interesting revelations is that one of the co-authors was none other than Michael Mann of hockey-stick fame. Yet, the study asserted a Medieval Warm Period and a Little Ice Age – contrary to the hockey-stick. The study claimed to establish a global sea level model for the past 2000 years, which it validated by using studies of microfossils from sediment cores taken in the coastal salt water marshes of mainland North Carolina. These were then compared with North Carolina tidal gage records going back only 80 years. From this 80 year record, the researchers extrapolated back 2000 years!

According to the study, the area was selected because it is not rebounding from being burdened by ice during the last Ice Age.

Environmentalists generally refer to these coastal salt water marshes as “fragile wetlands” and these wetlands have a number of interesting characteristics. They are broad, flat, generally marshy lands made of plants, silt, and sand which were formed by sediments from the long term erosion of the Appalachian Mountains and other uplands. As one can see by looking at a road map, these wetlands may stretch as far as 50 miles deep into main part of the state. As with most coastal areas built up by sediments, they are probably subject to subsidence, sinking in relation to the surrounding land or water.

During the last Ice Age, streams and rivers cut channels through these sediments, but as the sea levels rose by about 400 feet after the last Ice Age, the channels became tidal estuaries resulting in wide rivers and bays. The areas are subject to erosion and accretion caused by the tides and storms such as hurricanes and northeasters.

The areas are partially protected from ocean waves by a series of barrier islands made of sand which shift over the years. As the islands shift, they change the influence that tidal currents and storms have on these wetlands. To suggest that a model of global sea levels can be based on studies of such unstable lands is highly questionable.

The natives of these areas call land that is suitable for farming and building “fast” (stable) land. It appears this study is not built on fast land.

Given the difficulty that Richard Lindzen, a Member of the National Academy of Sciences, had with the editors of the Proceedings who refused to publish an article without almost impossible restrictions, as described in last week’s TWTW, one must wonder about the standards used when this new study is readily published. Please see referenced articles under “Change Seas” and “Climategate Continued.”


Number of the Week is $106.8 Billion. According to a May 2011, report to Congress by the US General Accountability Office, the total Federal Government funding for climate change from 1993 to 2010 amounts to $106.7 Billion. This does not include the revenues lost to the Federal Government for special deductions and tax credits (including grants in lieu of tax credits) of $16.1 Billion. These bring the total to $122.8 Billion.

The 2009 “Stimulus Bill” provided $26.1 Billion of this amount, with $25.2 Billion to the Department of Energy, including $16.8 Billion for energy efficiency and alternative energy. In the Fiscal Years (FY) 2009 and 2010 (which ended on September 30, 2010), the Federal government provided $52.8 Billion in climate change funding.

In terms of four stated general categories (without regard to agency) of the total funding, not including the Stimulus Bill, $43.0 Billion is categorized as technology, $31.3 Billion is categorized as science, $5.0 Billion is categorized as international aid, and $65 Million is categorized as wildlife adaptation.

One of the benefits of this funding may have been new satellites to better understand the earth and its weather, yet, including the Stimulus Bill, of $21.6 Billion to NASA only $1.1 Billion fell in the category of Direct Technology / Exploration. Under the general category of Science, NASA received $20.6 Billion for science, aeronautics and technology (note there may be errors due to rounding). The Department of Energy is the agency that has received the most funding — $58.7 Billion.

Global warming / climate change is big business in the US, courtesy of the taxpayer. Apparently, Washington is unaware of the high unemployment rate and economic stagnation in the rest of the country. Please see referenced article under “Expanding the Orthodoxy”


Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI): 557% Increase: President Obama’s proposed budget for FY 2012 includes $1,328 Million for the Global Climate Change Initiative, representing a 557% increase since FY 2008 of $202 Million. “The GCCI is implemented through programs at the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and is funded through the Administration’s Executive Budget…”

“The President’s FY2012 budget request follows on the December 2010 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations in Cancun, Mexico, which formulated a package of ‘nationally appropriate’ measures toward the goal of avoiding dangerous climate change.” This is part of “…a commitment to near-term and long-term climate financing for the least developed countries amounting to near $30 billion for the period 2010-2012 and $100 billion annually by 2020.”

The referenced agreement has not been approved by Congress and there is no reason why Congress should fund such a program. Please see referenced article under “Expanding the Orthodoxy.”


“Clean Energy” $243 Billion in 2010: On her web site, Jo Anne Nova picked up an announcement by the warming alarmist and alternative energy promoter, Pew Environment Group that calculated that the world investment in “clean energy” for 2010 was $243 Billion.

“The clean energy sector is emerging as one of the most dynamic and competitive in the world, witnessing 630 percent growth in finance and investments since 2004,” said Phyllis Cuttino, director, Pew Clean Energy Program. “In 2010, worldwide finance and investment grew 30 percent to a record $243 billion.”

If the poorly defined clean energy sector is so dynamic and so competitive, why does it continue to need subsidies and mandates from Western governments? These subsidies and mandates are nothing but raw political patronage to a few selected industries courtesy of the taxpayers. Is it not time that these dynamic industries be set free of the need for government funding and oversight? Please see referenced articles under “Subsidies and Mandates Forever.”


Continued Flooding: Daily, the US news bombards the public with reports of flooding. Flooding is always serious, but is to be expected in towns build on relatively low lying lands near rivers, bays or oceans. Meteorologist Joseph D’Aleo explains that the flooding is due to record snows and a prolonged cold winter.

The town of current concern, Minot, ND, is built on the Souris (Mouse) River which has interesting characteristics. The river starts from marshes in Canada and flows south into North Dakota then swings north and east back into Canada, eventually flowing into the Red River which empties into Lake Winnipeg in Manitoba. The generally low-laying Red River basin is notorious for flooding after hard winters because the ice and snow melts in the south before it melts in north. The slow melt in the north dams and restricts river flows, backing up the river.

Contrary to the alarmist claims, the current US floods are not the result of global warming. Please see referenced articles under “Changing Weather.”

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –


For the numbered articles below please see:


1. Science and Smear Merchants

By S. Fred Singer, American Thinker, Jun 21, 2011


2. Why Do We Pretend to Understand Climate Change

By Ross Clark, Express, UK, Jun 17, 2011 [H/t Tom Harris]


3. That Footnote in Yesterday’s Global Warming Ruling

By Sam Kazman, Global Warming.org, June 21, 2011


4. And the Climate Tort Cashiered

Justice Ginsburg’s finest hour

Editorial, WSJ, Jun 21, 2011


– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –


Science: Is the Sun Rising?

Solar Science, Little Ice Ages and Journalism

By David Whitehouse, The Observatory, Jun 20, 2011


[SEPP Comment: Excellent overview of the news relating to last week’s announcement of the possibility of the sun entering a prolonged period of inactivity.]

Claim; Sunspots to Disappear, Global Cooling May Enure

By Matt Peckham, Time, Jun 15, 2011 [H/t John Cribbes]


[SEPP Comment: Another example calculations based on a false interpretation of IPCC science.]

Climategate Continued

PNAS Reviews: Preferential Standards for Kemp (Mann) et al

By Steve McIntyre, Climate Audit, Jun 22, 2011


Peer Review and ‘Pal Review’ in Climate Science

By Patrick Michaels, Forbes, Jun 16, 2011


U.N. climate propaganda exposed

Industry lobbyists behind ‘scientific’ claims in IPCC press release

Editorial, Washington Times, Jun 17, 2011


Challenging the Orthodoxy

Is the PDO real or a skeptic invention

By Joseph D’Aleo, ICECAP, Jun 19, 2011


Is ‘Global Cooling’ Happening?

By David Whitehouse, The Observatory, Jun 24, 2011


Dear Prime Minister

By the Fair Farming Group, Quadrant, AU, June 23, 2011 [H/t Tom Quirk]


The Rubber Duckies: Two United Nations giants of junk

By Peter Foster, Financial Post, Jun 17, 2011


Defenders of the Orthodoxy

NOAA: U.S. unprepared for changes in Arctic ice

By Renee Schoof, Sacramento Bee, Jun 20, 2011 [H/t WUWT]


Oceans in distress foreshadow mass extinction

By Staff Writers, AFP, June 20, 2011


Climate change disasters could be predicted

By Sarah Hoyle, Eurekalert, Jun 19, 2011 [H/t WUWT]


[SEPP Comment: To do so would requiring abandoning the IPCC science and models.]

Questioning the Orthodoxy

Things can only get worse

By Martin Livermore, Scientific-Alliance, Jun 23, 2011


Atmospheric carbon dioxide buildup unlikely to spark abrupt climate change

By Vince Stricherz, Univ. of Washington, Jun 19, 2011 [H/t WUWT]


New Paper “Recent Wind Driven High Sea Ice Export In The Fram Strait Contributes To Arctic Sea Ice Decline” By Smedsrud Et Al 2011

By Roger Pielke, Sr, Pielke Climate Science, Jun 21, 2011 [H/t WUWT]


Ask and ye shall receive NOAA

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jun 18, 2011


Questioning the European Green

Poland blocks bolder EU climate emissions cut

By Staff Writers, AFP, Jun 21, 2011


Message from the International Gas Union to European policymakers: Let’s get serious (about gas)!

By Reiner Gatermann, European Energy Review, Jun 20, 2011


Expanding the Orthodoxy

Climate Change: Improvements Needed to Clarify National Priorities and Better Align Them with Federal Funding Decisions

By Staff Writers, Summary, GAO-11-317, May 20, 2011 [H/t Timothy Wise]


The Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI):

Budget Authority and Request, FY2008-FY2012

By Richard K. Lattanzio, Congressional Research Service, US Government, June 1, 2011


Problems within the Orthodoxy

Alarm as EU Budget chief questions global warming

By Andrew Willis, EU Observer, Jun 22, 2011 [H/t GWPF]


As climate talks sputter, UN scientists vet ‘Plan B’

By Staff Writers, AFP, June 18, 2011


Communicating Better to the Public – Exaggerate?

Why the End is Always Near, but Never Arrives

By Alan Caruba, Warning Signs, Jun 22, 2011


Saving the world and the ocean, one activist opinion at a time – another NGO flap, this one duped global media

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jun 21, 2011


Oceans heading for mass extinctions, experts warn

Scientist: Situation is ‘more dire’ than any of us thought

By Staff Writers, MSNBC, Jun 21, 2011


[SEPP Comment: Following the IPCC formula – publish a preliminary report “summary” with extreme claims first, then publish the full report that may or may not support earlier claims.]

Changing Weather

Flooding due to record snows and second fastest decadal cooling period in the record not warming

By Joseph D’Aleo, ICECAP, Jun 24, 2011


Florida – La Nina Spring 2011 Drought

By Joe D’Aleo, Weather Bell, Jun 20, 2011


Minot Forced to Evacuate Early

By Christine McEnrue, Weather Bell, Jun 23, 2011


Changing Climate

Did climate change cause Greenland’s ancient Viking community to collapse?

By Staff Writers, SPX, Jun 22, 2011


[SEPP Comment: Asked and answered decades ago.]

Changing Seas

Penn researchers link fastest sea-level rise in 2 millennia to increasing temperatures

By Evan Lerner, U. Pennsylvania, Jun 20, 2011 [H/t Ken Jorgensen]


Sea Level Study Leads to Divisions

By Markus Becker, Spiegel, Jun 21, 2011 [H/t GWPF]


Riggs’ Geological Perspective on North Carolina Sea Level

By Steve McIntyre, Climate Audit, Jun 23, 2011


Leading German Meteorologist: Michael Mann’s Seal Level Story Is “A Quack”

By P. Gosselin, No Tricks Zone, Jun 23, 2011 [H/t ICECAP]


The Political Games Continue

What’s the great hurry?

By Garth Paltridge, Quadrant, AU, Jun 19, 2011


Labor’s Euro vision provides the smoke and mirrors for a carbon tax

Greg Sheridan, The Australian June 18, 2011 [H/t Des Moore]


Litigation Issues

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Climate-Change Public Nuisance Suit

By Staff Writers, Power News, Jun 22, 2011


The Carbon Ruling

Editorial, NYT, Jun 21, 2011


[SEPP Comment: The slant from the NYT is that the EPA is one of the few “remaining regulatory weapons the government can use to combat global warming” and that the Court reaffirmed the law and the government’s obligation to regulate carbon dioxide.]

Regulator State Wins Big In Court

Editorial, IBD, Jun 20, 2011


Supremes retreat from climate panic

Ruling returns environmental rules to politicians, not courts

By Steve Milloy, Washington Times, Jun 21, 2011


Supreme Court delivers win to power companies in greenhouse gas emissions case

By Robert Barnes, Washington Post, Jun 20, 2011 [H/t Conrad


Supreme skeptics

By Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post, Jun 23, 2011


Conservative group sues NASA for climate scientist’s records

By Ben Geman, The Hill, Jun 22, 2011


Subsidies and Mandates Forever

Clean energy “investments” just a tiny $243 Billion in 2010

By Jo Nova, her blog, Jun 25, 2011


[SEPP Comment: A guide to easy money.]

Investing in Clean Power

PEW Environmental Group, May 29, 2011


[SEPP Comment: A race that many developed nations would be better off if they lose.]

New England’s Renewable Energy Mandate: Reality Anyone?

By Lisa Linowes, Master Resource, June 24, 2011


“Onshore wind in New England currently demands between 9-11 cents per KWh, more than twice the wholesale price of natural gas. Offshore wind is even more expensive starting at over 18 cents a KWh. More wind energy in the fuel mix will cause upward pressure on energy prices for the life of the power purchase agreements.”

New coalition hopes to jump-start Obama’s ‘clean energy standard’

By Ben Geman, The Hill, Jun 20, 2011


Retire the kernel, release the gas

Era of fuel subsidies should end

Editorial, Washington Times, Jun 20, 2011


EPA and other Regulators on the March

EPA Extends Public Comment Period for Proposed Toxic Air Rule

By Staff Writers, Power News, Jun 22, 2011


Energy Issues

Nuclear Fears & Responses

Analysis: Germany goes back to black in snub to green power

By Peter Dinkloh and Christoph Steitz, Reuters, Jun 20, 2011 [H/t GWPF]


[SEPP Comment: Ideals hit costs]

Fukushima raises questions about new Finnish reactor

By Staff Writers, AFP, June 21, 2011


TVA progresses with mPower project

By Staff Writers, World Nuclear News, 17 June 2011


[SEPP Comment: Planning for small “packaged” nuclear plants.]

Nuke agency official: Yucca work politicized

By Ben Geman, The Hill, 06/24/11


Oil and Natural Gas – the Future or the Past?

Environmentalists push to keep U.S., others from oil drilling in Arctic

By Jason Welsh, Washington Times, Jun 21, 2011


Energy: What’s All the Fracking Fuss About?

By Larry Bell, Forbes, Jun 21, 2011


Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Energy

Three Gorges tarnishes new hydropower?

By Staff Writers, UPI, Jun 21, 2011


[SEPP Comment: Four new dams with twice the capacity of the Three Gorges – two to open by 2013. Western nations are losing this race for alternative energy.]

How green is my energy?

By Geoffrey Luck, Quadrant, AU, Jun 24, 2011


Rare earth prices surge as China tightens grip

By Staff Writers, AFP, June 20, 2011


Solar Dawn will be Largest Plant of its Kind in the World

By Staff Writers, SPX, Jun 22, 2011


PSC Allows Installation of Largest Land-Based Wind Turbines in NY

By Staff Writers, SPX, Jun 21, 2011


[SEPP Comment: 492 feet – about as tall as a 50 story concrete office building.]

Review of Recent Scientific Articles by NIPCC

For a full list of articles see


Cardiovascular Deaths and the Weather in Budapest

Reference: Toro, K., Bartholy, J., Pongracz, R., Kis, Z., Keller, E. and Dunay, G. 2010. Evaluation of meteorological factors on sudden cardiovascular death. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine 17: 236-242.


Precipitation Extremes Along North America’ West Coast

Reference: Mass, C., Skalenakis, A. and Warner, M. 2011. Extreme precipitation over the west coast of North America: Is there a trend? Journal of Hydrometeorology 12: 310-318.


The Future of North American Wheat Production

Reference: Olmstead, A.L. and Rhode, P.W. 2011. Adapting North American wheat production to climatic challenges, 1839-2009. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 108: 480-485.


Summer Temperatures in the Northern French Alps

Reference: Millet, L., Arnaud, F., Heiri, O., Magny, M., Verneaux, V. and Desmet, M. 2009. Late-Holocene summer temperature reconstruction from chironomid assemblages of Lake Anterne, northern French Alps. The Holocene 19: 317-328.


Environmental Industry

Browner, former White House climate czar, joins green group board

By Ben Geman, The Hill, Jun 23, 2011


Other Scientific News

Surprises from the ocean: Marine plankton and ocean pH

By Staff Writers, SPX, Jun 23, 2011


[SEPP Comment: Apparently at least one group of phytoplankton can regulate their internal pH to build calcium carbonate. This calls into question the simplistic studies funded by EPA, and others, on the impact of increases of dissolved carbon dioxide in the oceans – the so-called ocean acidification.]

Teeming with life, Pacific’s California current likened to Africa’s Serengeti Plain

Decade of electronic tagging, tracking of 23 top Pacific Ocean predators reveals remarkable homing by marine animals, well-defined highways

By Terry Collins, Eurekalert, Jun 22, 2011


Cryosat produces its first Arctic ice thickness map

By Anthony Watts, WUWT, Jun 21, 2011


– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –


Princess of whales: How a naked female scientist tries to tame belugas in the freezing Arctic

By Daily Mail Reporter, Jun 16, 2011


American Cancer Society Declares Poverty a Carcinogen

By Susan Campbell, Hartford Courant, Jun 21, 2011 [H/t Best of the Web]


Study: Biodegradable plastics can release methane

By Helen Chappell, News Observer, Jun 20, 2011 [H/t Paul Chesser]


[SEPP Comment: When products made from hydrocarbons degrade they release hydrocarbons?]

PLEASE NOTE: The complete TWTW, including the full text of the numbered articles, can be downloaded in an easily printable form at this web site: http://www.sepp.org/the-week-that-was.cfm…

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Robert Morris
June 27, 2011 8:40 am

I’m sure its an interesting article, but do all the links REALLY need to be on the home page, rather than in the body or the blog article?

The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley
June 27, 2011 8:44 am


June 27, 2011 8:51 am

You might want to put most of this post behind a jump.
[Thanks, fixed. ~dbs, mod.]

June 27, 2011 9:42 am

Re: Red River floods
The floods are at their worst when there has been late rain in the Autumn, followed by an early freeze. In the spring meltwater cannot soak into the frozen ground due to a surface ice sheath, so nearly all of it becomes run-off. That combined with heavy winter snows and a northern ice dam, just south of Lake Winnipeg is a formula for major flooding. The great Winnipeg flood of 1950 was just 61 years ago, and there again we have the 60 year cycle appearing.

June 27, 2011 10:01 am

Inhofe as the keynote speaker shows beyond a reasonable doubt that the agenda is political and not scientific. When you say “internet blogs provide a more rigorous analysis of questionable climate science studies than the “peer review” process does,” you have hammered the last nail into your own coffin.

June 27, 2011 10:20 am

Princess of whales: How a naked female scientist tries to tame belugas in the freezing Arctic
By Daily Mail Reporter, Jun 16, 2011
Just when you think things couldn’t get any sillier…
P.S. I am hoping beyond hope that a certain A. Gore doesn’t get any ideas from the above article. (Apologies in advance to anyone who clawed out their own eyes after imagining that scenario.)

Dave Wendt
June 27, 2011 11:12 am

H.R. says:
June 27, 2011 at 10:20 am
Princess of whales: How a naked female scientist tries to tame belugas in the freezing Arctic
By Daily Mail Reporter, Jun 16, 2011
I know I’m probably in a very small minority around here, but I hereby cast my vote for more naked broads swimming with whales stories at WUWT. Just the thing to drive the push for 100 million hits. Lure them in with a little T&A then hit them with a dose of climate reality. Willis is great, but he needs serious marketing help.

June 27, 2011 2:39 pm

With the EPA now found to be handing out grants to foreign countries, the action to regulate that which they fund elsewhere demonstrates that the Agency is hostile to the US economy.
Congress could, and should, shut the EPA down. We need the likes of Lisa Jackson shooting holes in our commerce, industry and consumer confidence like we need another financial meltdown.

James Sexton
June 27, 2011 2:39 pm

Mike says:
June 27, 2011 at 10:01 am
Inhofe as the keynote speaker shows beyond a reasonable doubt that the agenda is political and not scientific. When you say “internet blogs provide a more rigorous analysis of questionable climate science studies than the “peer review” process does,” you have hammered the last nail into your own coffin.
Lol, no Mike, the reality is, its hammering the last nail in the psuedo-science activism we see in alarmism. I guess, if you’re young enough, you won’t know where any skepticism came from, so you wouldn’t be aware of how this came to be.
You see, skepticism is supposed to be part and parcel of science. In climatology, it isn’t. Hence, the blogosphere filled the void left by the psuedo-scientist commonly known as climatologists.
And, your welcome.

June 27, 2011 3:29 pm

And again news paper editors cry into there coffee. Partimers.

June 27, 2011 4:25 pm

These were then compared with North Carolina tidal gage records going back only 80 years. From this 80 year record, the researchers extrapolated back 2000 years!
Ken seems to be using an unusual meaning for extrapolation here. The 80 year tidal record is simply being used as a sanity check for the modern day end of the proxy analysis.

June 27, 2011 4:50 pm

@ H.R. says:June 27, 2011 at 10:20 am
You skeptics need to be a little more skeptical. For one, she is an animal trainer not a scientist, and it is doubtful the claims in the article are correct. (The was bad, but can be found with Google.)

June 27, 2011 5:26 pm

H.R. said:
June 27, 2011 at 10:20 am
> …naked female scientist tries to tame belugas…
She better watch out for them sperm whales!.
And the Arctic miscegenation laws, too.

June 27, 2011 6:14 pm

June 27, 2011 at 4:50 pm
How old are those whales? Are they minors? (Oh wait. They’re Belugas, not Minors. No law against contributing to the delinquency of a Beluga. Never mind.)
BTW, are your eyes OK? Did you manage to keep the Gore imagery out of your head? Didn’t mean to injure anyone but I’m afraid that toothpaste is already out of the tube.

June 27, 2011 6:52 pm

Oh, and Mike:
Mike says:
June 27, 2011 at 4:50 pm
@ H.R. says:June 27, 2011 at 10:20 am
“You skeptics need to be a little more skeptical. For one, she is an animal trainer not a scientist, […]”
You’ve got me stumped on that finely reasoned point. Is the article sillier because she’s not a scientist? Near as I could tell, silly started at “naked, in 1.5C water, Beluga whales.” and went downhill from there. Her employment status and highest degree attained beyond grade school has little bearing on the silly part, regardless of your claims to the contrary.
I’d be inclined to concede your carefully argued position that since she’s an animal trainer and not a scientist, it’s less silly… but I can’t. That article was a hoot!

Rhoda Ramirez
June 27, 2011 7:24 pm

I tried to post a comment about naked swimming ladies, beluga whales, and Al Gore but my computer frozed up. Sigh…probably saved the moderators having to snip me.

June 27, 2011 8:18 pm

@James Sexton says: June 27, 2011 at 2:39 pm
Would that you were as skeptical of the oil industry pandering politicians.

June 28, 2011 2:25 am

Mike says:
June 27, 2011 at 8:18 pm
@James Sexton says: June 27, 2011 at 2:39 pm
Would that you were as skeptical of the oil industry pandering politicians.
Like Al “Occidental” Gore and his father before him? I have to agree with you on that one, Mike.

Patrick Davis
June 28, 2011 8:23 am

“H.R. says:
June 28, 2011 at 2:25 am”
Indeed. Al “Occidental” Gore in the US and Ross “Gold Mine” Garnaut, an economist now touted as Gillard’s climate change adviser, in Australia. The BBC and many friends and family members of the current UK Govn’t ALL have some sort of vested interest in energy taxes. Enron first muted some form of tax on energy and Al “I invented the internet” Gore was a buddy of the CEO. Funny that!
It’s about the money stupid!

Bob Shapiro
June 29, 2011 7:24 am

“The climate alarmists released another study claiming accelerating sea level rise…. one of the co-authors was none other than Michael Mann of hockey-stick fame.”
“Given the difficulty that Richard Lindzen, a Member of the National Academy of Sciences, had with the editors of the Proceedings who refused to publish an article without almost impossible restrictions, as described in last week’s TWTW, one must wonder about the standards used when this new study is readily published.”
Especially since the NAS is a federally authorized and funded organization, would a FOI request on the acceptance standards be in order?

%d bloggers like this: