Open thread weekend

I’m a little burned out after nearly two weeks of covering Climategate 2.0, plus my children are demanding that I put up Christmas lights on the house. So, I’m taking the rest of the day off though may do an update late tonight when I do my regular late night forecast updates for radio stations.

In the meantime…

Talk quietly amongst yourselves about anything that we normally cover here. Don’t make me come back here.

Advertisements

138 thoughts on “Open thread weekend

  1. It’s interesting how initial truth is eventually replaced by increasing error.
    Adam Smith got it right, before Marx, Keynes and innumerable others got it wrong.
    Hubert Lamb got it right (with the MWP and the LIA) before others came and obliterated it all with an avalanche of trash, cheered on by the nattering nabobs of nihilism in the eco-activist groups.
    Sometimes it helps to revisit First Principles.

  2. Three Strikes Against the IPCC’s Asia Group
    (Summary: This post points out the cherry picking of quotations by the IPCC’s Asia group to spice up its widely publicized claim that 3/4 of a billion Asians were at risk of water shortages from glacier-melt.)
    Here’s a bone for the gang to gnaw on and flesh out (to mangle a metaphor). I haven’t fully researched the matter, but what I’ve noticed is intriguing.
    During a dispute with one of the one-star Amazon-reviewers (T. Bruner) of Donna Laframboise’s Delinquent Teenager book about the IPCC, I wrote:

    “She [DL] wrote, at Location 763 in Chapter 14: ‘When the IPCC declared that three-quarters of a billion people in India and China depend on glaciers for their water supply, is it not strange that its only source for this claim was the Stern review?’ The link she supplied there takes one to that section of the IPCC report, 10.4.2, where one can see the single citation for oneself, as I have done.”
    (My exchange with T. Bruner starts on the 5th comments page of his review, linked to below, but the most relevant material is on the 6th page. http://www.amazon.com/review/R3D6YKUGYE4WA0/ref=cm_cd_pg_pg5?ie=UTF8&cdForum=Fx2983WIRKIRW6A&cdPage=5&asin=B005UEVB8Q&store=digital-text&cdThread=TxO5HUAZSS2GUT#wasThisHelpful )

    Bruner pointed out that the Stern Review in turn had cited, as its authority for that statement, Barnett et al., which, unlike Stern, was a peer-reviewed and before-the-deadline publication. He added that the Fresh Water Group had cited Barnett alone, in Section 3.4.3 (of AR4).
    This made me wonder: Why had the Asia group taken the risk of violating the IPCC’s rules by citing Stern alone? Wouldn’t citing Barnett in addition, or instead, have been prudent?
    It’s unlikely that the group hadn’t been aware of the Barnett paper, given that it was cited by Stern, and given its relevance, recency, and prominent & prestigious source, which could be found in Stern’s bibliography:

    Barnett, T.P., J.C, Adam, and D.P. Lettenmaier (2005): ‘Potential impacts of a warming climate on water availability in snow-dominated regions’, Nature 438: 303-309

    So this relevant, recent, and prestigiously published primary source, Nature, which all contributors had access to in their libraries, was omitted in favor of citing a gray, secondary, after-the-deadline (2007, hence unpublished per the IPCC’s rules) source. (It’s not cited anywhere in the Asia Group’s chapter, per its References section.)
    Why? Let’s get started by looking at what the two sources and the Asia Group said. I’ve emphasized the most pertinent passages. (h/t to T. Bruner for the quotes.):

    1. Barnett et al., as summarized by the Fresh Water Group, in AR4 WGII Section 3.4.3:
    “Hence, water supply in areas fed by glacial melt water from the Hindu Kush and Himalayas, on which hundreds of millions of people in China and India depend, will be negatively affected (Barnett et al., 2005).”
    Go to 5th paragraph, last sentence, here:
    http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch3s3-4-3.html
    2. Stern Review, 2007, Section 3.2, page 63:
    “Climate change will have serious consequences for people who depend heavily on glacier meltwater to maintain supplies during the dry season, including large parts of the Indian sub-continent, over quarter of a billion people in China, and tens of millions in the Andes. (Barnett et al., 2005)”
    Go to p. 8 at this link: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/Chapter_3_How_climate_change_will_affect_people_around_the_world_.pdf
    4. Asia Group, in AR4 WGII Section 10.4.2.1:
    “Climate change-related melting of glaciers could seriously affect half a billion people in the Himalaya-Hindu-Kush region and a quarter of a billion people in China who depend [unqualified] on glacial melt for their water supplies (Stern, 2007).”
    Go to the second paragraph, second sentence, here: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch10s10-4-2.html

    Strike one: If the Asia group had cited Barnett at all it would have exposed its claims about three-quarters of a billion and “seriously affected” as being hyperbole. (Barnett et al. had used the less-exaggerated, less-alarmist words, “hundreds of millions” and “negatively affected.”) It’s not a big leap to infer that that was the motive for its omission. What other motive could there have been?
    (“Hundreds of millions” suggests the lower end of the one-hundred-million-to-one-billion range. If Barnett et al. had had three-quarters of a billion in mind when they wrote “hundreds of millions,” they’d likely have indicated that they were thinking of the upper part of the range by saying something like “over a half-billion” or “many hundreds of millions.”)
    Strike two: The Asia Group lied by omission by omitting Stern’s key qualification, “during the dry season.” Including it would have muted the alarmist impact of their sentence. It’s not a big leap to infer that that was the motive for its omission. What other motive could there have been?
    Strike three: The Asia Group’s gray-lit-backed claim of a 2035 melt-by date now looks likely to be a similarly culpable instance of cherry-picking in the service of alarmist hyperbole, rather than clueless unfamiliarity with the dynamics of glaciers. They were likely knaves, not fools, in other words.
    One reason it’s “likely” is the context provided by the two “strikes” above. Another reason is the context provided by their refusal to correct the error in their 2035 melt-by date when reviewers pointed it out to them, and their turning a deaf ear to Dr. Georg Kaser’s subsequent attempts to have it corrected.
    (I’m skeptical of the IPCC’s excuse that Kaser sent his first complaint to the wrong department—wouldn’t they have forwarded it?—and that his second letter wasn’t received—a “likely story.” It seems more likely to me that the group couldn’t possibly admit to ignoring his letters—so it didn’t.)
    Strike four: The three strikes above suggest that the IPCC has been infected by gang-of-green alarmism. The IPCC’s apologists have spun a deceptive damage-control message about the 2035 error by attributing it to ignorance, not malice—to cluelessness, not culpability. In the context of the deceptive pattern described above, that’s hard to believe.
    Obviously, it would be awkward for the IPCC if the second interpretation gained traction, because that would raise the questions, “Where did the gangrene start?”, “How far has it spread?”, “Is amputation needed?”, and “Or maybe a mercy killing?”.
    Paging Dr. Kevorkian!
    ========

    For a brief history of Himalaya-gate, see my comment here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/17/the-wit-and-wisdom-of-real-climate-scientist-dr-ray-pierrehumbert/#comment-683880

  3. Roger Knights says:
    December 4, 2011 at 1:06 pm
    Three Strikes Against the IPCC’s Asia Group…..
    _____________________________
    Nice summary of Himalaya-gate http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/17/the-wit-and-wisdom-of-real-climate-scientist-dr-ray-pierrehumbert/#comment-683880
    How anyone can read all the information put together and not see the corruption and deceit is beyond me.
    And that bring up the point, IF CAGW is true, why all the deceit and name calling and turf protection?

  4. To add a bit of levity to a gray December day. This from an older article (8/10/2011) in Forbes.

    New Rasmussen Poll Sends Al Gore Into Meltdown
    A new Rasmussen poll shows the American public trusts the objectivity and credibility of impassioned global warming “scientists” about as much as used car salesmen, and boy is Al Gore ticked. If Michele Bachmann is Newsweek‘s Queen of Rage, Al Gore must be America’s potty-mouthed King of Bizarre Temper Tantrums….
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/08/10/new-rasmussen-poll-sends-al-gore-into-meltdown/

  5. We too have Christmas lights to finish. We’re just waiting for the next chinook to roll through.
    Have a good one AW.

  6. If anyone (NH) gets a lump of coal in their stocking this Christmas, keep it. You may find yourself grateful to have it in January. Brrrrrrrr!!!
    As for the Aussies, it looks like all their coal is headed to China. They will have to be really, really, really bad if they are to have a hope of getting a lump of coal ;o)

  7. Roger Knights says:
    December 4, 2011 at 1:06 pm
    “Three Strikes Against the IPCC’s Asia Group”
    The funniest part is that the IPCC report contains a table of glaciers and the speed with which they retreat or grow. ON THE SAME PAGE AS THE 2035 DATE!
    http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch10s10-6-2.html
    The only part they left out is the length of the glaciers; in the case of the Gangotri, for instance, 30km. So obviously nobody of them ever did this mental exercise called “computing” where you divide a length by a yearly distance to get an estimate of the number of years that have to pass until the thing is gone. This is, as the media repeatedly told us, the Gold Standard of climate science, and serves as the blueprint for all future international scientific collaborations under the UN.
    Arithmetics is not one of their strong points, though, it seems. I would love to peek over the shoulder of a climate modeler to see whether those guys are any better!

  8. James Taylor has another goodie over at Forbes:

    Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debateover 11/23/2011
    …..Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data.
    Regarding scientific transparency, a defining characteristic of science is the open sharing of scientific data, theories and procedures so that independent parties, and especially skeptics of a particular theory or hypothesis, can replicate and validate asserted experiments or observations. Emails between Climategate scientists, however, show a concerted effort to hide rather than disseminate underlying evidence and procedures…..

    “Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden,” Jones writes in another newly released email. “I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.”

    ….More damaging emails will likely be uncovered during the next few days as observers pour through the 5,000 emails. What is already clear, however, is the need for more objective research and ethical conduct by the scientists at the heart of the IPCC and the global warming discussion.
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/11/23/climategate-2-0-new-e-mails-rock-the-global-warming-debate/

    Looks like our work here is getting out to at least one major Mag.

  9. HR,
    While we may need it, the nanny-staters would be by to arrest us before the heat reached the rest of the house. You know how “evil” coal burning is, why we might even be tried for genocide.

  10. DirkH says:
    December 4, 2011 at 1:44 pm
    The funniest part is that the IPCC report contains a table of glaciers and the speed with which they retreat or grow. ON THE SAME PAGE AS THE 2035 DATE!….
    So obviously nobody of them ever did this mental exercise called “computing” where you divide a length by a yearly distance to get an estimate of the number of years that have to pass until the thing is gone. This is, as the media repeatedly told us, the Gold Standard of climate science, and serves as the blueprint for all future international scientific collaborations under the UN.
    ____________________________
    The ultimate example of why we REALLY REALLY need to get rid of the United Nations and just watch old Three Stooges movies instead. Twice as funny and does a lot less damage to the world economy.

  11. Beesaman says:
    December 4, 2011 at 1:45 pm
    Is it me or does it sound like Richard Black is either gloating over this report or trying to goad non-alarmists with it?
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16022585
    Odd how he’s not opening his BBC blogs up for debate at the moment!
    __________________________
    Goading.
    He is not opening comments because he does not want quotes from the new e-mails showing how the BBC was colluding with dishonest PSYCientists to promote alarmism.
    If someone finds just the right e-mail the BBC could be in really deep doo doo and Black would be under the whole pile.

  12. 1. Barnett et al., as summarized by the Fresh Water Group, in AR4 WGII Section 3.4.3:
    “Hence, water supply in areas fed by glacial melt water from the Hindu Kush and Himalayas, on which hundreds of millions of people in China and India depend, will be negatively affected (Barnett et al., 2005).”
    Go to 5th paragraph, last sentence, here:
    http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch3s3-4-3.html
    2. Stern Review, 2007, Section 3.2, page 63:
    “Climate change will have serious consequences for people who depend heavily on glacier meltwater to maintain supplies during the dry season, including large parts of the Indian sub-continent, over quarter of a billion people in China, and tens of millions in the Andes. (Barnett et al., 2005)”
    Go to p. 8 at this link:

    Stern was being deliberately deceptive. Barnett says the water supply will be negatively affected (by an unquantified amount), not the people.
    Barnett is also saying the dependence of hundreds of millions of people in China and India is on the water supply, not the glacial melt.
    Stern is being further deceptive by saying ” will have serious consequences for people who depend heavily on glacier meltwater to maintain supplies during the dry season”, because the dry season is the winter when there is, for practical purposes, no glacial melt. Stern’s statement is literally true, because the number of people who depend heavily on Himalayan glacier meltwater to maintain supplies during the dry season is zero.

  13. I sure would like to see some reliable information on west coast radiation levels.I haven’t heard much and what I have heard has seemed sketchy at best.I would like to think this site can give me the skinny.Thanks.

  14. With Apologies to: Ernest Lawrence Thayer 1863 – 1940
    revisited by kim2ooo
    Mannsey at the Bat
    The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the [ CRUville Team ] that day;
    The score stood four to two, with but one inning more to play,
    And then when [ Jonesey ] died at first, and [ Trenberth ] did the same,
    A pall-like silence fell upon the [ CAGW’ers ] of the game.
    A straggling few got up to go in deep despair. The rest
    Clung to that hope which springs eternal in the human breast;
    [ CRU ] thought, “If only [ Mannsey ] could but get a whack at that —
    We’d put up even money now, with [ Mannsey ] at the bat.”
    But [ Flying Gavin ] preceded [ Mannsey ], as did also Jimmy [ Hansen ] Blake,
    And the former was a hoodoo, while the latter was a cake;
    So upon that stricken multitude grim melancholy sat;
    For there seemed but little chance of [ Mannsey ] getting to the bat.
    But [ Gavin ] let drive a single, to the wonderment of all,
    And [ Hansen ], the much despised, tore the cover off the ball;
    And when the dust had lifted, and men saw what had occurred,
    There was Jimmy [ Hansen ] safe at second and [ Flying Gavin ] a-hugging third.
    Then from five thousand throats and more there rose a lusty yell;
    It rumbled through the valley, it rattled in the dell;
    It pounded on the mountain and recoiled upon the flat,
    For [ Mannsey ] , mighty [ Mannsey ], was advancing to the bat.
    There was ease in [ Mannsey’s ] manner as he stepped into his place;
    There was pride in [ Mannsey’s ] bearing and a smile lit [ Mannsey’s ] face.
    And when, responding to the cheers, he lightly doffed his hat,
    No stranger in the [ CRU ] could doubt ’twas [ Mannsey ] at the bat.
    Ten thousand eyes were on him as he rubbed his hands with dirt.
    Five thousand tongues applauded when he wiped them on his shirt.
    Then while the writhing pitcher [ McIntyre and McKitrick ] ground the ball into his hip,
    Defiance flashed in [ Mannsey’s ] eye, a sneer curled [ Mannsey’s ] lip.
    And now the leather-covered sphere came hurtling through the air,
    And [ Mannsey ] stood a-watching it in haughty grandeur there.
    Close by the sturdy batsman the ball unheeded sped —
    “That ain’t my style,” said [ Mannsey ]. “Strike one!” the [ bloggers ] said.
    From the [ CRU ] benches, black with people, there went up a muffled roar,
    Like the beating of the storm-waves on a stern and distant shore;
    “Kill him! Kill the umpire!” shouted [ Goresey ] on the stand;
    And it’s likely they’d have killed him had not [ Mannsey ] raised his hand.
    With a smile of [ suber-ego-osity ] great [ Mannsey’s ] visage shone;
    He stilled the rising tumult; he bade the game go on;
    He signaled to the pitcher [ McandMc ], and once more the dun sphere flew;
    But [ Mannsey ] still ignored it, and the [ bloggers ] said “Strike two!”
    “Fraud!” cried the maddened [ CRU ] thousands, and echo answered “Fraud!”
    But one scornful look from [ Mannsey ] and the audience was awed.
    They saw his face grow stern and cold, they saw his muscles strain,
    And they knew that [ Mannsey ] wouldn’t let that ball go by again.
    The sneer has fled from [ Mannsey’s ] lip, the teeth are clenched in hate;
    He pounds with cruel violence his bat upon the plate.
    And now the pitcher [ McandMc ] holds the ball, and now he lets it go,
    And now the air is shattered by the force of [ Mannsey’s ] blow.
    Oh, somewhere in this favored land the sun is shining bright,
    The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light,
    And somewhere men are laughing, and little children shout;
    But there is no joy in [ CRUville ] — mighty [ Mannsey ] has struck out.

  15. I’l still working out a carol in reply to Trenberth’s “Our First Nobel”. I think it is going to go something like “Do you smell what I smell?”

  16. Kids, and grand kids, matter, or why bother?
    If you want a photo of a SScreen up on the Grossglockner, email me.

  17. If it’s possible to be off-topic in an open thread, then this is. The most candid CV/resumé you’re likely to come across this week:
    http://curriculumvitiate.wordpress.com/the-cv/
    Got to admire someone who will inform prospective employers that “I like working on my own if there isn’t anyone fun to work with but can also stand the company of people I hold in contempt and am, in this sense, versatile. I can work incredibly long hours, and will work for very little money. I have ginger hair and for a lot of people this is a talking point. Sometimes I do not feel like I am completely in control of myself and I have to pinch myself very hard. I like the great outdoors. As of the 11th January 2011 I am free from all venereal disease. Thanks for taking the time out to read my application.”

  18. The problem with a lot of these alarmist scientists is that ego has become more important than ergo……
    But, I know that I’ll be around long enough to see all of this unravel, it is going to be great to see who stands on who in the mad scramble to climb out of the hole thy have dug for themselves. The question is who is going to make a bid for academic freedom first?

  19. Oh, and the “money quote” from the Tyndall report on shale gas is absolutely laughable:

    Apparently, what is more important is the need to avoid “jeopardising the UK’s international reputation on climate change”.

    Maybe the Brits can borrow a pair from Canada.

  20. Gail Combs says:
    December 4, 2011 at 2:01
    ____________________________
    The ultimate example of why we REALLY REALLY need to get rid of the United Nations and just watch old Three Stooges movies instead. Twice as funny and does a lot less damage to the world economy.
    ———————
    I don’t know Gail, I think the Stooges are good but really, twice as funny?

  21. So, if a doubling of CO2 causes a 3K rise in temperature, what does that do to the energy loss the earth experiences?

  22. Richard Sharpe says:
    December 4, 2011 at 3:38 pm
    Seems it is snowing heavily in Yorkshire this evening.
    =====================================================================
    Yorkshire??
    Is that the place where snow was thought to be a very rare occurrence and children might never see snow again?

  23. Excellent post by TonyB over at Judith Curry’s.A real breakthrough: both skeptics and warmists (except a few punch-and-judy trolls) seem to be in agreement that TonyB’s work is firstrate.
    Tony Brown has done an incredible backwards extension of CET to 1538, by estimating from copious notes recorded as to the weather that year. He’s gone back to bring Lamb out of retirement, effectively suggesting that here we have a good standard of Climate Science that Jones originally used, and to which we can return, to rebuild the science with its original openness to cultural, anthropological, archaeological evidence – and how to extract clear climate signals.
    A long piece but a highly satisfying read. Hope to see it here too.

  24. If it is possible to be off topic in an open thread, this is probably it.
    If you are in the market for a weather station, you should take a look at the weather station ad on this web site. I bought the Vantage Vue station from the Weather Shop a few months ago and am very pleased with it. My only concern is whether or not the solar collector will be able to collect enough energy to run it when our Northwest Coast winter darkness sets in in earnest.

  25. KV says:
    December 4, 2011 at 2:43 pm
    I sure would like to see some reliable information on west coast radiation levels.I haven’t heard much and what I have heard has seemed sketchy at best.I would like to think this site can give me the skinny.Thanks.
    _________________________________
    Try http://www.world-nuclear.org/

  26. Richard Sharpe says:
    December 4, 2011 at 3:38 pm
    “Seems it is snowing heavily in Yorkshire this evening.”
    Today there was a snow storm in Wittstock (NW of Berlin), and some north of Hamburg.

  27. Paul Homewood says:
    December 4, 2011 at 3:03 pm
    “Katharine “Global Weirding” Hayhoe is taking a bit of a battering over at Steve Goddard’s. The original story is here.”
    Hayhoe has her own consultancy. She produces GHG computer fantasies if paid. Her income depends on keeping the scare alive. H/T Steve Goddard
    http://atmosresearch.com/who_katharine.html

  28. Richard Sharpe says:
    December 4, 2011 at 3:38 pm
    Seems it is snowing heavily in Yorkshire this evening.

    How is the pudding?

  29. DirkH
    Funny, as a former Segway employee I actually know the guy riding/driving it in that video. Good guy, though he does burn (sunburn) pretty much anytime between dawn and sunset.

  30. W*T H*L*B*T says:
    December 4, 2011 at 2:49 pm
    > Iceland might blow up soon.
    And a meteor might hit my house soon.
    On what do you base your claim? I make a daily check on both Katla at http://en.vedur.is/earthquakes-and-volcanism/earthquakes/myrdalsjokull/ and El Hierro: in the Canary Is. at http://earthquake-report.com/2011/09/25/el-hierro-canary-islands-spain-volcanic-risk-alert-increased-to-yellow/ in my estimation, the risk of something interesting is greater at El Hierro, though things are not likely to explode.
    While Katla might blow up, there will be plenty of Iceland left behind.

  31. Smokey says:
    December 4, 2011 at 4:18 pm
    “My Open Thread contribution. Take it with a grain of salt. But, maybe…”
    Oh great, another threatened species we will have to take care for…

  32. crosspatch says:
    December 4, 2011 at 2:55 pm
    I’l still working out a carol in reply to Trenberth’s “Our First Nobel”. I think it is going to go something like “Do you smell what I smell?”
    __________________________________
    When ever I read about Trenberth’s “Our First Nobel” I think of the rooster winning the No Bell prize and Pullet Surprize. http://www.emmitsburg.net/humor/archives/groaners/groaner_15.htm

  33. @ crosspatch. Yeah I know, I read the link you posted a few hours ago. 😉 I was trying to be pithy and glib mate. (my sense humour is cr@p, must try harder).

  34. Been thinking about the more general concepts of Liberal/Conservative Progressive/regressive over the weekend as a result of Rich Halls Road movie documentary. where he used the Regressive term. And then shortly afterwards, on Beavis and Butthead, a video of something titled “Living off the grid” where they had to worship the larger of the clams the group ate because those were the elders of the clams.
    I know political discussions aren’t really wanted around here, and rightfully so. But no worries I’m not going down that particular road.
    But the Warmists are self defined “Progressives” but I find it very ironic that their idea of progression is in many ways to regress to the point in our history where we lived in the woods and worshiped nature like druids.

  35. The CV was funny. If it came in for one of the slots I was on the hiring committee for, I might even have called them for an interview just to see how funny it would be.
    I don’t know why they are even trying on the mammoth. They will never be able to get a viable breeding population with just ONE genetic example. Inbreeding is one thing, but this simply would not work. Why are they wasting the money and research time for something that will not “bring back” the mammoth, but only create a side show freak for the entertainment of a few.

  36. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682611002872
    New paper that backs up Svensmark.
    “A shared frequency set between the historical mid-latitude aurora records and the global surface temperature”
    “We show that a harmonic constituent model based on the major astronomical frequencies revealed in the aurora records and deduced from the natural gravitational oscillations of the solar system is able to forecast with a reasonable accuracy the decadal and multidecadal temperature oscillations from 1950 to 2010 using the temperature data before 1950, and vice versa. The existence of a natural 60-year cyclical modulation of the global surface temperature induced by astronomical mechanisms, by alone, would imply that at least 60–70% of the warming observed since 1970 has been naturally induced. Moreover, the climate may stay approximately stable during the next decades because the 60-year cycle has entered in its cooling phase.”

  37. Gail Combs says: December 4, 2011 at 1:37 pm
    “………. This from an older article (8/10/2011) in Forbes.”
    I found this passage in the Forbes article of particular interest:
    “Isn’t this the person who scornfully froze out Bill Clinton in the 2000 presidential campaign due to Clinton’s personal misconduct? Nowadays, it is hard to tell the difference between an Al Gore global warming lecture and two delinquent teenagers hanging out in the woods at night, smoking weed and drinking booze pilfered from their parents’ liquor cabinets.”
    This was written in early August. Perhaps Donna noticed the “two delinquent teenagers” in the final stage of her writing??

  38. 30% of American farmers are beyond retirement age.
    Average age of American farmers is 58 years.
    Forget “climate change”, the real impact to our food is going to come from old age.

  39. Smokey says:
    December 4, 2011 at 4:18 pm
    My Open Thread contribution. Take it with a grain of salt. But, maybe…
    _________________________________
    I am sure they want to clone several and then turn them loose in the USA.
    They have been quitely turning wolves and Jaguars loose on the east coast. The Jags are “Black” (melanistic) so the sightings are passed off as “inaccurate” Someone here in North Carolina caught a pick-up truck with a pair for release at a burger joint (he looked under the tarp and got the surprise of his life.) Several people I know have spotted them in my area.
    http://uk.reuters.com/article/2009/02/21/us-jaguar-idUKTRE51K02620090221
    http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Return_of_the_Jaguar.html
    http://www.easterncougar.org/newltr_pdf/crfnew_May11.pdf
    http://www.vancnews.com/articles/2008/12/31/warrenton/opinion/opinion03.txt
    “Pleistocene Rewilding”
    http://www.actionbioscience.org/newfrontiers/barlow.html
    http://www.rewilding.org/pleistocene_rewilding.html
    http://advancedconservation.org/library/donlan_etal_2006.pdf

  40. Loss of America’s farmers is a real problem unless the science of farming can keep up.So far they’ve done pretty good, but we all should be concerned about the future. Wow-so many things to be concerned about. Once again the leaves have covered my yard-somehow I’m not concerned.

  41. Ok you can lay off the Iceland thing now. I WAS trying to be humorous. See the nice long posts before mine? I just thought I’d shove in a little short one. Jeez.

  42. Owen says:
    December 4, 2011 at 5:06 pm
    …..I don’t know why they are even trying on the mammoth. They will never be able to get a viable breeding population with just ONE genetic example. Inbreeding is one thing, but this simply would not work. Why are they wasting the money and research time for something that will not “bring back” the mammoth, but only create a side show freak for the entertainment of a few.
    ______________________________
    I think there is a lot more viable DNA than what they are mentioning. http://www.grahamkendall.net/Unsorted_files-2/A312-Frozen_Mammoths.txt

  43. tokyoboy says:
    December 4, 2011 at 5:16 pm
    “………. This from an older article (8/10/2011) in Forbes.”
    Nowadays, it is hard to tell the difference between an Al Gore global warming lecture and two delinquent teenagers hanging out in the woods at night, smoking weed and drinking booze pilfered from their parents’ liquor cabinets.”
    This was written in early August. Perhaps Donna noticed the “two delinquent teenagers” in the final stage of her writing??
    __________________________________
    It is certainly possible. The “Occupy Wall Street Crowd” (pro CAGW) certainly fit the description.
    “…hanging out in the park at night, smoking weed, drinking booze and generally trashing the place…” And these are the people who want us to believe they are concerned for the environment???

  44. KV says:
    December 4, 2011 at 2:43 pm
    “. . . west coast radiation levels.

    Assuming you mean radiation from Fukushima reaching the North American west coast
    http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/ipad/fukushima-radiation-in-the-sea/story-fn6bqphm-1226198419555
    For fun– look up ‘BED’
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose
    On the other hand, if you are interested in issues – consider:
    In the USA, cantaloupes produced about 30 deaths from Listeriosis.
    And in Germany it was organic bean sprouts – 35 dead, 100 with severe kidney damage, and more than 3,200 ill.

  45. New Zealand ETS scheme under threat ??
    According to an article in the Sunday Star Times (NZ) of 4 December, the New Zealand ETS and carbon credits arrangements could be under major threat.
    http://tinyurl.com/6lsx7yh
    I have sometime mused that cAGW may finally fail, not through some undeniable scientific “proof” – but should rather wither and die from simple economic realities.
    Some too have suggested that the NZ scheme for carbon credits is “just in case” it is needed on the world stage (we are heavily dependent on our export markets) and in particular, to keep in with the Aussies, our nearest largish market. Now if there was to be a reality check just across the ditch, maybe both schemes would be put on ice and eventually disbanded.
    Here is hoping
    normb

  46. Philip Bradley says:
    December 4, 2011 at 2:42 pm

    2. Stern Review, 2007, Section 3.2, page 63:
    “Climate change will have serious consequences for people who depend heavily on glacier meltwater to maintain supplies during the dry season, including large parts of the Indian sub-continent, over quarter of a billion people in China, and tens of millions in the Andes. (Barnett et al., 2005)”
    Go to p. 8 at this link:
    Stern was being deliberately deceptive. Barnett says the water supply will be negatively affected (by an unquantified amount), not the people.
    Barnett is also saying the dependence of hundreds of millions of people in China and India is on the water supply, not the glacial melt.
    Stern is being further deceptive by saying ” will have serious consequences for people who depend heavily on glacier meltwater to maintain supplies during the dry season”, because the dry season is the winter when there is, for practical purposes, no glacial melt. Stern’s statement is literally true, because the number of people who depend heavily on Himalayan glacier meltwater to maintain supplies during the dry season is zero.

    As I’ve understood it, glaciers form and/or grow when annual snowfall exceeds melt + sublimation.
    Thus, even if temperatures increased so that snow melt exceeded snowfall and even if this continued until the glaciers had completely melted, would this represent anything but essentially the same equilibrium as when the glaciers were in stasis?
    The source of the moisture is not local and there’s no assertion that there will be less snowfall.
    So what if all of the annual snowfall melts every year. That’s how it works in my neighborhood; that’s how I’ve seen it work in the California Sierra Nevada (yes, I know that there are glaciers in the Sierras but in most areas, the snow melts completely each year, albeit, in June or July).
    To be sure, this does not rule out the possibility of important second order effects from a loss of glacial cover but that is hardly the same as the breathless reporting that water supplies are in peril.
    Anyway, that’s what I think.

  47. The LA Times has an article today about the difficulty of getting supplies to Nome, Alaska because the port is locked in ice. A paragraph in the middle of the article:
    “The problem is only one of a growing number facing the Coast Guard as higher global temperatures bring increased shipping traffic to the Alaskan Arctic.”

  48. Folks with access to the decoded MIME attachments might want to have a look at
    1077.txt
    and the attached Karl=WGI.doc Word document.

  49. crosspatch says:
    December 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm
    The reference to my above comment on farmers comes from…
    ____________________________
    I can confirm that from the Ag Census I studied a while ago. Given the current state of farming there are very few full time farms in the USA. In North Carolina it is something like 400 and we are a “Farming State” Actually you have to be absolutely NUTs to go into farming now given the changes since 1995.
    The really nasty part is the Mega-Corporations have already been holding seminars on how to pass their liability for food borne illness to the farmers. THAT is what the changes to HACCP in 1996 [ http://www.agpolicy.org/weekcol/467.html ] were all about as well as 1995 the WTO Agreement on Ag. The whole system was changed to the use of “risk assessment ” and “traceability” instead of traditional government inspection and testing of food therefore corporations are no longer inspected and the liability from the resulting illness can be passed off to the farmer.
    “Traceability techniques can provide additional guarantees as to the origin, type or organoleptic quality of food products.” http://www.oie.int/eng/edito/en_edito_apr08.htm
    Yet it is obvious that traceability does nothing to prevent disease, it only allows blame to be placed after the fact.
    The World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) changed how disease and food safety is handled around the world. The USDA decided to change focus from disease eradication to disease “prevention” by changing from a zero tolerance import policy to a “scientifically-based and transparent risk assessment,” and opening US borders to trade in “low risk commodities”. This is why the USA has suddenly been flooded by tainted imports. They are obviously considered “low risk” http://www.animalagriculture.org/Proceedings/1996%20Proc/GATT%20NAFTA%20and%20the%20Future%20of%20Animal%20Health%20and%20Trade.htm
    Transfer of Corporate Liability
    Wisconsin was the first state to make NAIS (animal traceability) mandatory. The corporate response is quite interesting. Family farmers have feared that:

    “One of the big goals of NAIS is to shift liability to the farmers and off of the packers and retail chains. This is despite the fact that virtually all food contamination happens at the slaughterhouse and beyond.” http://nonais.org/2008/07/08/transferring-liability/

    Paul-Martin:Griepentrog on September 3, 2008 reported that this was indeed the case. He attended “quality assurance training required for Badger Vac 45.” And reported

    “You [the farmer] will be required to cover ALL expenses in the event of contamination…The bottom line is that after 10 years [note the date] of below normal prices here in Wis because the state allowed Equity Livestock Coop to create a monopoly, our savior has now arrived to burden us with contracts shifting all liability to feeder cattle producers if they can’t prove they are innocent. “ http://nonais.org/2008/09/01/bulletin-board-200809/#comment-1395096

    There was even a conference scheduled in 2009 addressing how to pass the blame to farmers!

    Conference to address food-borne illness litigation
    “The conference will cover topics such as aligning damage assessments/expectations with the outcomes from recent resolved litigation; managing an outbreak effectively to minimize shareholder and reputational risk afterwards as quickly as possible; and how to measure and prove actual control of various players in the movement of contaminated food to accurately assess apportionment of liability…. http://www.meatingplace.com/MembersOnly/webNews/details.aspx?item=10369

    This whole mess is going to be bad for the consumer too.
    In the USA over 90% of the farmers ALREADY have an outside job because farming will not pay a living wage. According to the latest USDA Ag Census it costs a farmer $15,000 a year to keep farming. Therefore they can not afford the “Improvements” mandated by “Good Farming Practices” they will get saddled with thanks to the new Food Safety Modernization Act. Add in a 22% unemployment rate, the housing market slump and we find farmers are between a rock and a hard place, since raising farm prices is not an option. Since 1984, the real price of a USDA market basket of food has increased 2.8 percent while the farm value of that food has fallen by 35.7 percent.
    This is not only happening in the USA. ……more than 160,000 farmers have committed suicide in India since 1997 (Note the date) The press is trying to say CAGW was the cause, but India’s farmers do not agree. That is why they recently beat the living daylights out of a Monsanto rep.
    DR. VANDANA SHIVA said in an interview, “… globalization as it’s shaped right now under the coercive rules of trade under the World Trade Organization, of the World Bank and IMF structure adjustment, basically doesn’t create wealth.
    It takes the wealth of the poor and puts them in the hands of global corporations, leaving insecurity behind. In addition, decisions that we made as national systems, whether it was decisions about how we run our intellectual property rights systems. What do we do with our water? How do we do our agriculture? What seeds we plant? What price our crops will sell at?
    All those are decisions taken out of the country, put into the hands of the World Trade Organization or put into the hands of global corporations.”

    THAT is exactly what the traitors in Congress just did to US farmers too with the new Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010.

    SEC. 404. <> COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS.
    Nothing in this Act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization…
    http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/FSMA/ucm247548.htm

    Again WTO was ratified in 1995.
    The International Ag Cartel
    Professor Connor of Purdue University found that since 1997 some 85% of all fines for price fixing have been imposed on food and agriculture cartels. http://www.agecon.purdue.edu/staff/connor/papers/index.asp

    ..Today three companies, Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, and Bunge control the world’s grain trade. Chemical giant Monsanto controls three-fifths of seed production. Unsurprisingly, in the last quarter of 2007, even as the world food crisis was breaking, Archer Daniels Midland’s profits jumped 20%, Monsanto 45%, and Cargill 60%. Recent speculation with food commodities has created another dangerous “boom.” After buying up grains and grain futures, traders are hoarding, withholding stocks and further inflating prices…. http://www.globalissues.org/article/758/global-food-crisis-2008

    …Then, in spring 2008, prices just as mysteriously fell back to their previous level. Jean Ziegler, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, calls it “a silent mass murder”, entirely due to “man-made actions.” Through the 1990s, Goldman Sachs and others lobbied hard and the regulations [controlling agricultural futures contracts] were abolished. Suddenly, these contracts were turned into “derivatives” that could be bought and sold among traders who had nothing to do with agriculture. A market in “food speculation” was born. The speculators drove the price through the roof.”
    http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-how-goldman

    Perhaps the most damning piece of evidence is comparing the date the WTO was ratified (1995) and the graph of world hunger
    Number of hungry people, 1969-2010 (source FAO)
    http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/10/images/hungry_timeseries.jpg
    Clinton even admits that wiping out farmers was the goal.

    “President Bill Clinton, now the UN Special Envoy to Haiti, publicly apologized last month for forcing Haiti to drop tariffs on imported, subsidized US rice during his time in office. The policy wiped out Haitian rice farming and seriously damaged Haiti’s ability to be self-sufficient.” http://www.democracynow.org/2010/4/1/clinton_rice

    The possibility of increased world famine and sharply rising food prices is a certainy. The only question is when.
    This is an interesting bit of fiction, just five paragraphs from Huw Rowlands 09/08 and well worth the read.SLEEPWALK TO STARVATION http://warmwell.com/redpollpredict.html

  50. What I found interesting in 1077.txt is that it seems to indicate directly that they have incorporated WWF information into an IPCC document.

  51. I’m interested mostly in the physics. Has anyone seen any empirical evidence (well, ANY evidence, other than cartoons and diagrams) for a “greenhouse effect” yet?
    I didn’t think so.

  52. Some interesting emails concerning various “Climate Statement” docs as they were working busily behind the scenes figuring out how to position it and what groups to use to push the issue in which regions. (Looks like WWF was used in Europe. I started with 5323.txt but the emails on the subject are:
    0183.txt
    0191.txt
    0981.txt
    3275.txt
    5323.txt
    I should probably look at them in chronological order. 3275 and 5323 seem to involve a lot of coordination with WWF.

  53. sagoldie says:
    December 4, 2011 at 6:23 pm
    …Stern was being deliberately deceptive…..
    ….The source of the moisture is not local and there’s no assertion that there will be less snowfall.
    So what if all of the annual snowfall melts every year. That’s how it works in my neighborhood; that’s how I’ve seen it work in the California Sierra Nevada (yes, I know that there are glaciers in the Sierras but in most areas, the snow melts completely each year, albeit, in June or July).
    To be sure, this does not rule out the possibility of important second order effects from a loss of glacial cover but that is hardly the same as the breathless reporting that water supplies are in peril.
    Anyway, that’s what I think.

    ____________________________________________
    Yes you caught the fallacy in logic. This is typical of much of CAGW.

  54. Old stuff for some of you, but just think:
    Maybe Ike was not the only one who foresaw the current AGW debacle.
    Albert Einstein reportedly said,
    “Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of truth and knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.”

  55. jae says:
    I’m interested mostly in the physics. Has anyone seen any empirical evidence (well, ANY evidence, other than cartoons and diagrams) for a “greenhouse effect” yet?
    ——–
    The climate difference between the Earth and the Moon is the greenhouse effect.

  56. @Rober Clemenzi, not true. Mars has 5,000 ppm of CO2 in its thin atmosphere and its climate is equal to the Moon. The difference is existence of ATMOSPHERE and OCEANS.

  57. Juraj V. says:
    @Rober Clemenzi, not true. The difference is existence of ATMOSPHERE and OCEANS.
    —-
    You are right, it is called the greenhouse effect.
    I have no idea why you think 5,000 ppm of CO2 on Mars changes that definition.

  58. Ric~ There will be plenty of Iceland left, yes.
    And they’ll be (briefly!) warmer.
    At least, the parts that aren’t rather wet.
    The timing is a bit inauspicious, though. Imagine a Pinatubo-sized blast, right at the cusp of global cooling…

  59. No, the orthodox definition of greenhouse effect is, that only “greenhouse gases” raise the surface temperature by re-radiating part of outgoing LWIR back to the surface. It is obviously not true, since 5,000 ppm of CO2 on Mars does nothing. On the other hand, thermal capacity of atmosphere (99% N2+O2) + oceans can explain, why Earth is not Moon. And those pesky greenhouse gases, well.. evaporation, cloud shielding and ice/snow albedo are all of considerable cooling effect, so the allegedly most powerful “greenhouse gas” in all its forms cools us.
    I believe that basic premise of Church of Climatology – that wrongly calculated +33K attributed to “back-radiation” – is fundamentally wrong. The rest is history.

  60. Mr Clemenzi, the difference between the moon and earth doesn’t demonstrate the greenhouse effect only that one planet has an atmosphere and one doesn’t. What happens on Mars can also be said to demonstrate that there is no radiative greenhouse effect.

  61. Alarmist Ranking
    I would like to see a weekly list of alarmists and their organisations, ranked in descending order of the enormity of their alarmist claims. Perhaps that list could be hosted at WUWT or a similar site.
    I suggest that each time a person (and their organisation if they are in one) makes an alarmist claim, they are awarded points from 1 to 100 depending on how ridiculous their claim is and how much influence that person has. Each week the list is sorted and the top 50 or 100 names published. Each week the points for each person are reduced by 2% so that the points fade out after a year.
    However if someone, e.g. a journalist, cites a false claim from years ago, that person is awarded points and goes on the list.
    The effect of this alarmist list is to show who continues to make false alarmist claims. If they stop doing that, they will automatically disappear from the list.
    We could start the list as of now, or check WUWT and CA articles for the last year and start awarding points. I’ll do much of the work if someone will publish the list!

  62. From the South African Newspaper “BusinessDay” on 2011/12/02,
    [ http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/Content.aspx?id=160223 ]
    COP-17: SA ‘should industrialise renewable energy sector’
    On Wednesday the government is expected to announce the results of the first tender bid for renewable projects, involving 53 projects with a capital expenditure of more than R64bn
    THE industrialisation of renewable energy technology in SA could generate employment, but the sector was being hamstrung because of high levels of surplus components held in stock by global suppliers, Gerrit Kruyswijk of the Industrial Development Corporation said yesterday.
    On Wednesday the government is expected to announce the results of the first tender bid for renewable projects, involving 53 projects with a capital expenditure of more than R64bn.
    Country policies on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions have driven the renewable energy industry worldwide, and while the industry accounts for less than 1% of SA’s electricity generation capacity, the intention is to lift this to 9% by 2030.

    Mr Leimecke said the first bid for renewable projects in SA represented a “learning curve” for the industry, and a continuous programme of bids would reduce the risk premium on project financing costs, as well as cut other costs, such as for technical expertise, most of which was having to be imported, and through the emergence of more competitive contractors on renewable projects.
    I guess that in the religion of Gaia and church of CAWG, all nations need to repeat the same mistakes (rites?) instead of learning from the errors of other, such as Greece, Spain, UK, Australia, USA (to a slightly lesser extent). So after South Africa, who’s next on the list of self-destroyed economies?
    /WishingItWasSARC

  63. Ric Werme,
    Ric, I think skeptics should respond to Mann’s tantrum in his WSJ article. What, exactly, was “stolen”? When something is stolen, it is gone. But the original emails are still there; but now the public – who paid for those emails – now has access to them. What’s wrong with that?
    Michael Mann is the most self-serving, devious propagandist out of a clique of self-serving propagandists. There is nothing unusual happening with the global climate. But if Mann et al. admitted that fact, they would lose their lucrative taxpayer paid grants.
    Lying for money is as old as humanity. It is time to call Mann and his alarmist cronies on their defrauding of already hard-bitten taxpayers.

  64. Does anyone else remember the “tipping point”. It was the critical factor in turning AGW into Catastrophic AGW. We were supposed to be only a few degrees from a tipping point after which the climate system would go into a runaway positive feedback mode and we would all fry (or roast).
    As I remember it, the MWP was a problem because there were people claiming that the earth had already exceeded the tipping point at least once and had clearly not gone into positive feedback mode. I believe it was in that context the Mann used tree rings to prove that there had been no global MWP. If Mann was wrong and there was a global MWP then the tipping point idea is discredited and the catastrophic part of CAGW is also. Hence the need to defend Mann and the Hockey Stick.
    If I am wrong about this I am sure I will be corrected here. If not, I believe the connections described above should not be forgotten. The MWP is one of the greatest weaknesses of the CAGW theory.

  65. Ric Werme says:
    December 5, 2011 at 4:54 am
    Duke C. says:
    December 4, 2011 at 9:09 pm
    > Michael Mann unleashes another rant in tomorrow’s Wall Street Journal:
    > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204449804577068211662483248.html
    Ric and All, this appeared in The Hill this morning (from the Washington Post)…
    http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/197115-schwarzenegger-to-gop-2012-field-move-green-energy-debate-past-solyndra
    There currently is a push to extend the folly of 1603 grants too.
    http://www.masterresource.org/2011/12/section-1603-extension-no/

  66. Gail Combs says: December 4, 2011 at 5:45 pm
    Owen says:
    December 4, 2011 at 5:06 pm
    […]
    ______________________________
    I think there is a lot more viable DNA than what they are mentioning. http://www.grahamkendall.net/Unsorted_files-2/A312-Frozen_Mammoths.txt

    I’ll read your link in a few minutes, but I remember a NG article about an expedition in Siberia that ate the frozen mammoths to survive. They were surprised at how freshly frozen the meat was. That was a key component to a climate fiction story in the past decade about super storms bringing on the next ice age by forcing extra cold air to the surface, flash freezing everything. Was it ‘The Day After Tomorrow’?

  67. Is Micheal Mann’s article a part of this ongoing effort?
    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/12/04/132047/penn-states-legal-pr-bills-could.html
    excerpt:
    Keith Trivitt, associate director of public relations at the Public Relations Society of America, said monthly retainers for PR firms can run from $10,000 to $20,000. In a situation like Penn State’s, he said, a PR agency would likely receive a project fee rather than an ongoing retainer.
    He said hiring outside public relations agencies is generally something that is done in a corporate environment. It’s becoming more common in this digital age, he said, when crises can quickly snowball.
    He said it’s probably good practice in the case of Penn State “because the situation has gone so far beyond what Penn State or anyone else thought was possible.”

  68. Duke C. says:
    December 4, 2011 at 9:09 pm
    Michael Mann unleashes another rant in tomorrow’s Wall Street Journal:
    http://online.wsj.com/article
    Just read the comments! You can hear the groans from the CRU and RC! He has been ripped to bits! Mann resorts to the worst, calling Dellingpole a “Climate Change Denier” (I am sure J.D, knows climate changes!) uses the “Big Oil” and “Tobacco” garbage etc.
    Please! Someone at Penn, nip round to his office and steal that shovel he uses! He used to be an embarrassment, now he seems to be the Kings Fool!

  69. Smokey says:
    December 5, 2011 at 5:23 am
    Ric Werme,
    Ric, I think skeptics should respond to Mann’s tantrum in his WSJ article. What, exactly, was “stolen”? When something is stolen, it is gone. But the original emails are still there; but now the public – who paid for those emails – now has access to them. What’s wrong with that?

    It’s kind of like someone complaining of their stolen goods being stolen from them.

  70. martin mason says:
    the difference between the moon and earth doesn’t demonstrate the greenhouse effect only that one planet has an atmosphere and one doesn’t.
    No, the difference IS the greenhouse effect. It exists on Earth because it has an atmosphere. The mechanism is very straight forward. The maximum daily temperature is lower on Earth because of convection. The minimum nighttime temperature is higher because of back radiation.
    What happens on Mars can also be said to demonstrate that there is no radiative greenhouse effect.
    Most people don’t understand that 5,000 ppm of CO2 on Mars contains fewer molecules per unit volume than 32 ppm of CO2 on Earth because of the difference in pressure.
    5,000 ppm * 6.36 mb/1014 mb = 31.4 ppm on Earth
    Merely comparing concentrations leads to bad conclusions.

  71. Gail, thanks for the mammoth link, excellent.
    Pete H says:December 5, 2011 at 7:36 am
    Duke C. says:
    December 4, 2011 at 9:09 pm
    Michael Mann unleashes another rant in tomorrow’s Wall Street Journal:
    http://online.wsj.com/article

    That link goes to page not found…

  72. Richard Sharpe says:
    December 4, 2011 at 3:34 pm
    So, if a doubling of CO2 causes a 3K rise in temperature, what does that do to the energy loss the earth experiences?
    As the planet heats up it expands and thus gets nearer the sun which in turn heats it up further. Oh no another positive fedback mechanism! It’s thermal runaway! We are all doomed.

  73. @ Steve Keohane says:
    December 5, 2011 at 9:04 am
    Andrew Gunther and Bill Weismann are being busy little bees at WSJ trolling the comments. They’ve added about 10 unfounded ‘refutations’ of the comments critical and Mann and Global Warming in the last few minutes. Interesting to watch trolls working in tandem on another website. And I note at Forbes one troll has accused the Climategate 2.0 release as being the work of an advertising agency, for how else have ‘millions’ of e-mails been so quickly cherry-picked unless the ‘deniers’ have received funding from a powerful agency.

  74. I left this at Forbes
    kim2ooo 3 minutes ago
    russellseitz You mean a PR group like Realclimate’s Environmental Media Service – Fenton Communication released the emails taxpayers paid for?
    Permalink Flag
    Reply

  75. Richard Clemenzi;
    Actually, that 5,000 ppm is an Earth-equivalent pressure comparison. The ppm re Mars’ own atmosphere is very close to 1,000,000 since virtually the entire atmosphere is CO2.

  76. Brian H says:
    December 5, 2011 at 2:55 pm
    Robert Clemenzi;
    Actually, that 5,000 ppm is an Earth-equivalent pressure comparison. The ppm re Mars’ own atmosphere is very close to 1,000,000 since virtually the entire atmosphere is CO2.

    Good catch. Based on a nasa Mars factsheet
    953,200 ppm * 6.36 mb/1014 mb = 5,979 ppm on Earth
    However, I am still not sure how this disproves back radiation.

  77. ..However putting up some Christmas lights will surely be harder than dealing with FOIA posts…
    Need to have joints in good condition 🙂
    And we have only one Gleissberg Cycle to move around..

  78. @ Dirk H – “Hayhoe has her own consultancy. She produces GHG computer fantasies if paid.”
    All models point to Hayhoe charging a fee of 30 pieces of silver.

  79. Dirk H:
    You cite: “Experiment by Dr. Roy Spencer:
    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/08/help-back-radiation-has-invaded-my-backyard/
    Sorry, fella but I don’t doubt “downradiation,” so your ref. is neither “here or there.” The FACT is that there is NO empirical evidence that the down-radiation has any effect on temperatures. Sorry. All the empirical evidence shows that the quantity of greenhouse gases is not linked to temperature. Compare Pheonix and Atlanta (same latitude and elevation), for example (Atlanta has 3X the amount of GHGs, but is cooler in summer).
    More important, maybe, is that the OCO levels keep going up every year, but the temperatures keep going down for the last 10-15 years.
    So, WTF, Dirk?

  80. jae says:
    I don’t doubt “downradiation,” … The FACT is that there is NO empirical evidence that the down-radiation has any effect on temperatures.
    If you plot lapse rates over a period of time, you can see the effect. It is pretty obvious. (I suggest looking at Antarctica.) Proving that doubling CO2 does something, well that is another issue.

  81. The temperature at the tropics is typically around 30degC and well below what it’s equilibrium temp should be giving the level of incoming radiation. In desert areas it can get to 50C and the hottest temperature is in the location of least GHGs. Based on this can I assume that GHGs actually cool the atmosphere? I’ve worked in many deserts where there wasn’t much difference between clear sky day time and night time temperatures. Given that the level of GHGs is very low both day and night how does this happen?

  82. martin mason says:
    December 6, 2011 at 1:52 am

    The temperature at the tropics is typically around 30degC and well below what it’s equilibrium temp should be giving the level of incoming radiation. In desert areas it can get to 50C and the hottest temperature is in the location of least GHGs. Based on this can I assume that GHGs actually cool the atmosphere? I’ve worked in many deserts where there wasn’t much difference between clear sky day time and night time temperatures. Given that the level of GHGs is very low both day and night how does this happen?
    Storage heating. The sand absorbs heat by day and slowly disipates it through the night.

  83. Why does the NSIDC use a 1979-2000 baseline average for Arctic Sea ice. I thought 30 years made climate? The have the data now, don’t they? I read something recently about states updating their climate norms with the most recent three decades? Why doesn’t the NSIDC do the same?
    MrC

  84. I’d like to reach Mr. Watts with the message that his editorial policy results in the exclusive publication of articles that overlook what is, in fact, the major shortcoming of IPCC climatology. This is that the IPCC’s argument for AGM is berift of the ideas of: 1) a statistical event and 2) an observed statistical event. The argument presented by IPCC Working Group I in its 2007 report references no observed statistical events with the the consequence that this argument is non-falsifiable, thus lying outside science. I’d be happy to provide details.

Comments are closed.