Moderated Global Warming Discussion

[Trakar]

In other related news Penn State has concluded the hysterical accusations against Mike Mann have no basis

http://live.psu.edu/story/47378

I thought this had already occurred?!

Addendum: Reading through the report, I see where most of the original allegations were resolved back in March and that we were awaiting the final committee investigation finding on the final allegation which was just completed -

http://live.psu.edu/fullimg/userpics/10026/Final_Investigation_Report.pdf

A good, informative read, top to bottom.

 

[bit_pattern]

In the news today...

Climate to warm at double rate
JULIETTE JOWIT, LONDON
July 7, 2010

THE world is heading for an average temperature rise of nearly 4 degrees, according to a global analysis of national pledges. Such a rise would bring a high risk of major extinctions, threats to food supplies and the near-total collapse of the huge Greenland ice sheet.

 

[bit_pattern]

 

[macdoc]

Consequences

Heat Waves Could Be Commonplace in the US by 2039

ScienceDaily (July 9, 2010) — Exceptionally long heat waves and other hot events could become commonplace in the United States in the next 30 years, according to a new study by Stanford University climate scientists.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100708122617.htm

 

[Farsight]

Terrible all this whitewash isn't it? IMHO it's really bad for AGW:

CRU brand remains toxic.

The public are really starting to get irritated with the blatant propaganda now. It's all going to end in tears. Very sad.

 

[uke2se]

Terrible all this whitewash isn't it? IMHO it's really bad for AGW:

CRU brand remains toxic.

The public are really starting to get irritated with the blatant propaganda now. It's all going to end in tears. Very sad.

The public is slowly getting wise to the liars posting that kind of blogs. The sort of slander those people threw out after SwiftHack makes their lack of apology now that Jones and CRU have been exonerated not once, not twice but three times - not counting certain other independent investigations - is nothing short of outrageous. I'm thinking that this is indeed going to end in tears. Tears from the editors of the denialist newspapers when people stop reading their tosh.

I'm not too surprised to see the word "whitewash" being thrown around by denialists, though. I mean, what else do they have? Nothing, that's what, except more lies.

 

[Pixel42]

CRU brand remains toxic.

The public are really starting to get irritated with the blatant propaganda now.

Exactly what evidence does this blogger have that his opinion on this matter is shared by the public?

Let's be clear what the bottom line is here: No evidence of any dishonesty or manipulation has been found in any of the official investigations. All scientists accused of malfeasance have been cleared of all such charges. Not one shred of science has been corrected or refuted as a result of the stolen emails and subsequent lynch mob accusations.

The only charge that can be made to stick at all is that a few scientists, faced with an attempt to disrupt their important work by abusing well-meaning legislation in the service of a political agenda, responded by being deliberately obstructive. Looks like scientists are human, hold the front page.

It's certainly a shame that they allowed themselves to be goaded into such behaviour, it was unprofessional, but it's not grounds to sack them, so Jones' re-instatement is perfectly justified. I for one am delighted that he is now back doing the vital work for which he is eminently qualified, and I know there are plenty of people who agree with me.

Incidentally I liked the way this latest enquiry established just how vexatious most of the FoI requests were. I notice your blogger doesn't mention this bit:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/science_and_environment/10538198.stm

"We find that CRU was not in a position to withhold access to such data or tamper with it," it says.

"We demonstrated that any independent researcher can download station data directly from primary sources and undertake their own temperature trend analysis".

Writing computer code to process the data "took less than two days and produced results similar to other independent analyses. No information from CRU was needed to do this".

Sir Muir commented: "So we conclude that the argument that CRU has something to hide does not stand up".

Asked whether it would be reasonable to conclude that anyone claiming instrumental records were unavailable or vital code missing was incompetent, another panel member, Professor Peter Clarke from Edinburgh University, said: "It's very clear that anyone who'd be competent enough to analyse the data would know where to find it.

"It's also clear that anyone competent could perform their own analysis without let or hindrance."

 

[BenBurch]

In spite all the hot air from the denier apparatchiks, or perhaps because of it, the planet has had the warmest first half-year on record. So, they can try to deflect attention to some out-of-context emails from frustrated stalking victims, but AGW isn't going to politely go away because of that;

 

[bit_pattern]

Tears from the editors of the denialist newspapers when people stop reading their tosh.

A case in point: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2010/07/the_australians_war_on_science_51.php

The (Murdoch) Australian hasn't even rported on the "whitewash". despite running dozens of articles on the SwiftHack (thx uke2se, so much more original than freaking climategate, or any other moronic 'scandal' with a -gate tacked on the end)

 

[bit_pattern]

And from the NYT:

Given the trajectory the scientists say we are on, one must hope that the academy’s report, and Wednesday’s debunking of Climategate, will receive as much circulation as the original, diversionary controversies.

Ha! Not bloody likely

 

[Halsu]

Hi - the "Climategate" investigations are now done. It seems all the involved scientists have been cleared from any accusations of scientific wrongdoing.

There were some slaps on the wrist for FOIA stuff, and for not explaining the methology used in WMO "hockey stick" (not the IPCC or Mann ones), but overall, the accusations were shown to be false.

Here's the stuff:

http://www.cce-review.org/
http://www.cce-review.org/pdf/FINAL REPORT.pdf
http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/CRUstatements/SAP
http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/CRUstatements/oxburgh
http://www.realclimate.org/docs/387.pdf
http://www.parliament.uk/business/n...ta-disclosure-from-university-of-east-anglia/
http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/CRUstatements/muirrussellreport
http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/MannInquiryStatement.html
http://www.research.psu.edu/orp/Findings_Mann_Inquiry.pdf
http://live.psu.edu/story/47378
http://live.psu.edu/fullimg/userpics/10026/Final_Investigation_Report.pdf
http://www.realclimate.org/docs/ST_Correction_img007[1].jpg
http://climateprogress.org/2010/06/...onathan-leake-simon-lewis-apology-retraction/

 

[shadron]

And a follow-up:



You gotta love James Woolsey!

"When you pull into a filling station, if you should happen to hear on the radio the little 8 year old Palestinina boy, or an 8 year old Pakistani boy, has died as a suicide bomber, and you wonder, 'Who is paying to teach those little boys, at age eight, to want to be suicode bombers? Who's running those ... who's paying for those madrasses who are doing that?' You don't need to do too much more, than before you get out to charge your gas, turn the rear view mirror just a few inches, so that you are looking at your own eyes.

"Now you know who is paying for the other side on the war on terrorism."

 

[MattusMaximus]

The public is slowly getting wise to the liars posting that kind of blogs. The sort of slander those people threw out after SwiftHack makes their lack of apology now that Jones and CRU have been exonerated not once, not twice but three times - not counting certain other independent investigations - is nothing short of outrageous. I'm thinking that this is indeed going to end in tears. Tears from the editors of the denialist newspapers when people stop reading their tosh.

I'm not too surprised to see the word "whitewash" being thrown around by denialists, though. I mean, what else do they have? Nothing, that's what, except more lies.

Well, they may be using the term "whitewash" now, but at least they haven't gone this far...



... YET.

 

[macdoc]

4 degrees C seems inevitable....peruse the consequences courtesy Google.

Google climate map offers a glimpse of a 4C world

Interactive tool layering climate data over Google Earth maps shows the impact of an average global temperature rise of 4C

A new interactive Google Earth map showing the impacts of a 4°C world A new interactive Google Earth map was developed using peer-reviewed science from the Met Office Hadley Centre and other leading impact scientists. Photograph: earth.google.co.uk

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/jul/14/google-climate-data

 

[bit_pattern]

Interview with Stephen Schneider on the PNAS climate science expert credibility study:

 

[BenBurch]

Resource; http://www.ecotrends.info/EcoTrends/

 

[bit_pattern]

Seems Monckton is trying to incite the Wattard minions to begin an harassment campaign against St. Thomas University to try and force them to remove Prof. John Abraham's excellent debunking of Monckton's lies (see my sig). A page has been set up for people to voice their support for Abraham and St Thomas in not caving to these jackbooted thugs. Link to the page and the full story here: http://www.skepticalscience.com/Monckton-tries-to-censor-John-Abraham.html

 

[stilicho]

Seems Monckton is trying to incite the Wattard minions to begin an harassment campaign against St. Thomas University to try and force them to remove Prof. John Abraham's excellent debunking of Monckton's lies (see my sig). A page has been set up for people to voice their support for Abraham and St Thomas in not caving to these jackbooted thugs. Link to the page and the full story here: http://www.skepticalscience.com/Monckton-tries-to-censor-John-Abraham.html

Great editorial by Jonathan Kay in yesterday's National Post: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...rs-are-a-liability-to-the-conservative-cause/.

Kay has previously taken on 9/11 conspiracists and it's good to see him facing off with the infiltration of climate change denial into the conservative movement:

The appropriate intellectual response to that challenge — finding a way to balance human consumption with responsible environmental stewardship — is complicated and difficult. It will require developing new technologies, balancing carbon-abatement programs against other (more cost-effective) life-saving projects such as disease-prevention, and — yes — possibly increasing the economic cost of carbon-fuel usage through some form of direct or indirect taxation.​

That's the part conservatives and conservative-minded scientists should be hammering away at. It is only through adaptation and technology that we are capable of advancement. There is a scientific solution out there; it simply needs to be located and developed.

​

 

[Trakar]

4 degrees C seems inevitable....peruse the consequences courtesy Google.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/jul/14/google-climate-data

And 4C isn't the end, but rather the beginning, "just getting warmed up" if you will.

 

[bit_pattern]

Interview with Stephen Schneider on the PNAS climate science expert credibility study:

Schneider passed away tragically yesterday from a heart attack, a real blow for climate science at a time when we need strong voices to slap down the deniers like he did with this recent study and it's subsequent coverage in the media