Open Thread Tuesday

http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/gauteng/joburg-snow-set-to-continue-1.1358412
“The economic cost of increased temperatures”? MIT?
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/SA-gripped-by-icy-conditions-20120807

While perusing the inter-web thingy I happened on a article titled “The Lynching of carbon dioxide”. one of the main paragraphs states______“Temperature changes are causing the CO2 changes and not the reverse. As oceans warm, they emit CO2, and as they cool they absorb it.”
http://iceagenow.info/2012/08/lynching-carbon-dioxide/

Three typhoons in the space of a week. Damrey, Saola and now Haikui. 23 dead and 9 missing. 200,000 people evacuated from Shanghai. Imagine the uproar in the climate blogosphere if this was hurricanes in the US. The climate debate is clearly mostly a US phenomenon. People in the US often have trouble noticing what is going on in the rest of the world.

The WSJ has an opinion article by Fred Krupp, president of the Environmental Defense Fund. One of the many blunders in this inept piece is this: [my bold]
“ . . . Berkeley physicist Richard Muller (also a climate skeptic) confirmed that temperatures have been climbing over the past five decades.”
At 2:46 P.M. PST there are 828 comments.
[Moderator’s Note: The article John is referring to is here. -REP]

@ur momisugly Smokey says:
August 7, 2012 at 2:41 pm
Gibson Guitar update.
***************************************************************
Thanks for that. I’ve been following this for a couple years. Gibson got screwed royally. You wouldn’t believe the damper this has put on fine woodworking nationwide. Every woodworker I know that uses exotic woods has been looking over their shoulder expecting some SWAT team to raid their one man shop and confiscate their stock, even if they’ve had it for decades. The Lacey act is nothing less than a license to steal from hardworking and talented people.

Unseen Science
The gold standard of science publishing is the Scientific Citation Index Expanded or SCIE, owned by Thomson Reuters. However it covers only a small percentage of all scientific literature.
“In a recent study we counted more than 15,000 scientific periodicals among the ‘BRIC’ countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China), of which just 495 — about 3 per cent — are listed in SCIE. [1]
“Amazingly, this is not an anomaly: we found that SCIE lists only about 3 per cent of journals for most scientifically advanced countries.
“This means that decision makers anywhere in the world relying on SCIE (or its cousins, Scopus or perhaps Google Scholar) do not account for, access, or compare as much as 90 per cent of scientific output — works we call “unseen science”.
“The first step towards any global assessment should be an inventory of the various types of scientific outputs and their sources. There are many possible configurations — for example, electronic only or electronic and paper; frequency of publication; how many places the same article is published (pre- and post-publication); links to supporting data; open source or subscription; editor or peer reviewed.
“A move towards standard terms for types of outputs would help analysts make accurate counts, and policymakers to use all available information in decision making.
“Inclusion may require that regional or national governments, or perhaps academies of science, invest in good accounting and a national library of all scientific periodicals — which must be open access — such as Russia is attempting at elibrary.ru.”
http://www.scidev.net/en/latin-america-and-caribbean/opinions/uncovering-the-world-s-unseen-science.html

With sadness I pass on reports of the death at age 98 of Sir Bernard Lovell, the designer? and head of the team that instigated the Jodrell Bank Radio Telescope for University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology. The passing of one of the great Scientists and Engineers. This planet is now a poorer place.
Condolences to his family and former colleagues.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19164236
johnr

RE: WSJ Frupp article.
I posted comment #83 (3rd on page 9). I copied it over to Tips. As this is an open thread and the Frupp article is mentioned upthread, I’ll post the comment here with formatting and links.
————————————————
There is so much deception in this article.
Muller never was a global warming skeptic. He was a believer that fossil fuel would lead to global warming back in the 80s when he resigned from the Sierra Club over their opposition to nuclear power.
Muller’s BEST study cannot decern a Urban Heat Island signature in the data. This despite the fact that most thermometers are buried in growing urban areas. Occams Razor tells me the simplest answer is that BEST is not capable of finding UHI or doesn’t want to. I have been skeptical of BEST’s approach since April 2011 based upon Fourier Analysis theory – they destroy critical low frequency in temperature records by cutting up long records into shorter ones. There is a fundamental loss of information in the process. I don’t trust it.
Krupps asks whether we can agree:
Dramatic Alterations to Climate are here…. No. this year is not as bad as 1988 to name one.
are likely to get worse…. No. Hurricanes and tornados are down, just to name two things.
with profound damage to the economy…. No. and no worse than the cure anyway.
unless sustained action is taken…. Well that depends upon the action doesn’t it?
\\ Economist recently editorialized about the melting Arctic…//
Like THAT will persuade me? Mr. Krupp, you or the EDF didn’t have anything to do with that editorial, did you? [Like Scientific American, it is a shame what has become of the Economist].
In short, I and most of my friends will not agree to these points. Nice Try. Stating falsehoods a fact is an old trick, but we’re on to you. Can’t believe Krupps view of Muller. Can’t believe BEST.
\\ one of the hallmarks of modern conservatism is to try to see the world as it is //
Why thank you, Mr. Krupp.
And I see that you are trying to pull a fast one.
——————————————————————–

Given my recent attempt at a discussion of science with Eric Grimsrud, PhD in chemistry and a cagw alarmist, 6 hit the mark. Humorous and sad all at the same time because as funny as it seems, that is EXACTLY what arguing with the guy was like.