I'll believe its a crisis when peoples start acting

[silverscreenselect]

The decade of the '00s is the warmest on record, and 2009 tied with 2006 as the fifth warmest year on record since 1880 (when the started keeping accurate worldwide statistics).

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate ... ures_N.htm

Of course, as the article notes, parts of the United States were cooler than normal, which allowed a number of ignoramuses to yuk it up whenever there was a snowstorm somewhere.

[BackInTex]

The decade of the '00s is the warmest on record, and 2009 tied with 2006 as the fifth warmest year on record since 1880 (when the started keeping accurate worldwide statistics).

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate ... ures_N.htm

Of course, as the article notes, parts of the United States were cooler than normal, which allowed a number of ignoramuses to yuk it up whenever there was a snowstorm somewhere.

I'm convinced.

The global average is based on readings from more than 7,200 ground weather stations around the world and from ships and buoys at sea. Global weather data go back to 1880.

I'd be interested in comparing the reading from the bouys at sea, say in the 1890's or 1900's. What? They didn't have those bouys until the 1980's? Oh! So they are just guessing....again.

[BackInTex]

And then there is this....

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/un-r ... st-a-guess


UN Glacier Melting Claim Just A Guess

Jonathan Leake and Chris Hastings

January 17, 2010

A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.

Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world’s glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.

In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC’s 2007 report.

It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.

Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was "speculation" and was not supported by any formal research. If confirmed it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research. The IPCC was set up precisely to ensure that world leaders had the best possible scientific advice on climate change.

.....there is more but what is the point.

[BackInTex]

Let's put this in perspective.

Let me do it.

One SUV hardly produces much CO2.
One private jet produces relatively little CO2.
One mansion is not that much either, even with a pool, and hundreds of incandescent flood lights. Its just one mansion, probably using well less than 8 megawatts.

So Al Gore is O.K. with what he does.

But it's the hundreds of thousands of SUV that cause the problem.
So the hundreds of thousands of us who drive SUVs are the evil ones causing the problem.

Its the millions of us that fly and those thousands of flights a day cause a big problem.
So the millions of us that fly are the evil ones causing the problem.

But its not Al Gore.

What TMITSS was trying to point out and you've failed to see is the hypocrisy of the situation. Its akin to PETA hosting a bar-b-q fund raiser.

[Weyoun]

The decade of the '00s is the warmest on record, and 2009 tied with 2006 as the fifth warmest year on record since 1880 (when the started keeping accurate worldwide statistics).

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate ... ures_N.htm

Of course, as the article notes, parts of the United States were cooler than normal, which allowed a number of ignoramuses to yuk it up whenever there was a snowstorm somewhere.

Since the parts of the world that are the warmest are the ones where we've not had good monitoring of temperatures until the last couple of decades, this is not especially noteworthy.

[smilergrogan]

The decade of the '00s is the warmest on record, and 2009 tied with 2006 as the fifth warmest year on record since 1880 (when the started keeping accurate worldwide statistics).

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate ... ures_N.htm

Of course, as the article notes, parts of the United States were cooler than normal, which allowed a number of ignoramuses to yuk it up whenever there was a snowstorm somewhere.

Since the parts of the world that are the warmest are the ones where we've not had good monitoring of temperatures until the last couple of decades, this is not especially noteworthy.

You really think they just average together all the temperature readings, regardless of where they're from?

[Weyoun]

The decade of the '00s is the warmest on record, and 2009 tied with 2006 as the fifth warmest year on record since 1880 (when the started keeping accurate worldwide statistics).

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate ... ures_N.htm

Of course, as the article notes, parts of the United States were cooler than normal, which allowed a number of ignoramuses to yuk it up whenever there was a snowstorm somewhere.

Since the parts of the world that are the warmest are the ones where we've not had good monitoring of temperatures until the last couple of decades, this is not especially noteworthy.

You really think they just average together all the temperature readings, regardless of where they're from?

Who knows. They do seem to be extrapolating quite a bit from eight or so trees in Siberia.

[BackInTex]

You really think they just average together all the temperature readings, regardless of where they're from?

Of course not, they choose the ones that give them the results they want and apply a greater weight to them.

Didn't you read all those leaked emails?

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

Testing

[frogman042]

You really think they just average together all the temperature readings, regardless of where they're from?

Of course not, they choose the ones that give them the results they want and apply a greater weight to them.

Didn't you read all those leaked emails?

Yes, I read a lot of the leaked emails - point out the ones that say they did what you claim.

From what I read, the scientists writing the emails that got leaked have tons more credibility and show a greater respect for science then those who have taken out-of-context quotes with the sole purpose of poisoning the debate in the minds of the lay public.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

You really think they just average together all the temperature readings, regardless of where they're from?

Of course not, they choose the ones that give them the results they want and apply a greater weight to them.

Didn't you read all those leaked emails?

Yes, I read a lot of the leaked emails - point out the ones that say they did what you claim.

From what I read, the scientists writing the emails that got leaked have tons more credibility and show a greater respect for science then those who have taken out-of-context quotes with the sole purpose of poisoning the debate in the minds of the lay public.

http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails. ... 742144.txt

On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.

The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory.

Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country's territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports.

Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.

The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.

The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.

On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.

IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.

The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world's land mass. The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration.

Global-temperature data will have to be modified if similar climate-date procedures have been used from other national data because the calculations used by COP15 analysts, including financial calculations, are based on HadCRUT research.

RIA Novosti is not responsible for the content of outside sources.

http://en.rian.ru/papers/20091216/157260660.html

http://climateaudit.org/2009/12/16/iear ... mate-data/

[frogman042]

Of course not, they choose the ones that give them the results they want and apply a greater weight to them.

Didn't you read all those leaked emails?

Yes, I read a lot of the leaked emails - point out the ones that say they did what you claim.

From what I read, the scientists writing the emails that got leaked have tons more credibility and show a greater respect for science then those who have taken out-of-context quotes with the sole purpose of poisoning the debate in the minds of the lay public.

http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails. ... 742144.txt

On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.

The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory.

Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country's territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports.

Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.

The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.

The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.

On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.

IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.

The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world's land mass. The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration.

Global-temperature data will have to be modified if similar climate-date procedures have been used from other national data because the calculations used by COP15 analysts, including financial calculations, are based on HadCRUT research.

RIA Novosti is not responsible for the content of outside sources.

http://en.rian.ru/papers/20091216/157260660.html

http://climateaudit.org/2009/12/16/iear ... mate-data/

The 'Institute of Economic Analysis'? Where did they publish their analysis? Do you think they might have an agenda to discredit the idea of AGW? Do you hold them to the same critical standard as you seem to have for peer-reviewed research?

(edited to move my reply to the bottom)

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

I really don't know much about the Russian IEA, but then nobody really know how the sites in the various global temperature data sets were picked anyway and how they were adjusted. I does seem suspicious that the adjustments seem biased to warming. That reanalysis is really just beginning. It should have been done long ago. There are several regions have been analyzed and the results seemed inconsistent with significant global warming. Frankly just averaging the raw data makes more sense that what has been done.

on peer review

Recently rejected two papers (one for JGR and for GRL) from people saying CRU has it wrong over Siberia. Went to town in both reviews, hopefully successfully. If either appears I will be very surprised, but you never know with GRL.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

Meet the Pelosi family! Using Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, Judicial Watch uncovered thousands of pages of travel documents related to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's use of military aircraft.

What hasn't been revealed so far is that military aircraft are being used to shuttle Pelosi's kids and grandkids between DC and San Francisco without any Congressional representatives even onboard! Put simply, the United States Air Force is serving as a multi-billion dollar chauffeur- and baby-sitting service for Nancy Pelosi's kids and grandkids -- presumably because commercial travel is beneath the families of the autocrats.

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2010/0 ... n-get.html

Paul Pelosi, Jr. is the son of Nancy Pelosi (Speaker of the United States House of Representatives) and a speaker on environmental policies that encourage individuals and local governments to take a more active role in conserving natural resources and reducing carbon footprints. Over the past 12 months, Pelosi has spoken at international conferences in Stockholm, Milan, and Amsterdam. Pelosi is a contributor to the anthology Inside the Minds: Navigating Green Construction and Energy Initiatives, forthcoming from Aspatore Books in Spring 2009.

Pelosi is a graduate of Georgetown University with a Bachelor of Arts in History (Cum Laude, 1991) and a JD/MBA (Joint Degree 1995) with an emphasis in International Business.

[Bob Juch]

Meet the Pelosi family! Using Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, Judicial Watch uncovered thousands of pages of travel documents related to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's use of military aircraft.

What hasn't been revealed so far is that military aircraft are being used to shuttle Pelosi's kids and grandkids between DC and San Francisco without any Congressional representatives even onboard! Put simply, the United States Air Force is serving as a multi-billion dollar chauffeur- and baby-sitting service for Nancy Pelosi's kids and grandkids -- presumably because commercial travel is beneath the families of the autocrats.

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2010/0 ... n-get.html

Paul Pelosi, Jr. is the son of Nancy Pelosi (Speaker of the United States House of Representatives) and a speaker on environmental policies that encourage individuals and local governments to take a more active role in conserving natural resources and reducing carbon footprints. Over the past 12 months, Pelosi has spoken at international conferences in Stockholm, Milan, and Amsterdam. Pelosi is a contributor to the anthology Inside the Minds: Navigating Green Construction and Energy Initiatives, forthcoming from Aspatore Books in Spring 2009.

Pelosi is a graduate of Georgetown University with a Bachelor of Arts in History (Cum Laude, 1991) and a JD/MBA (Joint Degree 1995) with an emphasis in International Business.

Despite the blogger's statement that the aircraft was for the "sole use" of the travellers, there's nothing to indicate that. I hope you noticed that the cost of the trip was reimbursed. This is common practice by all members of Congress.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

This being the carbon hypocrite thread the rebursement is not important, but it seems clear that Pelosi, Jr isn't paying fair market rates for private jet service.

[Bob Juch]

This being the carbon hypocrite thread the rebursement is not important, but it seems clear that Pelosi, Jr isn't paying fair market rates for private jet service.

Please show me where anything proves he was the sole (or with family members) occupant. There's no way of telling how many people were on the plane nor what size it was.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

This being the carbon hypocrite thread the rebursement is not important, but it seems clear that Pelosi, Jr isn't paying fair market rates for private jet service.

Please show me where anything proves he was the sole (or with family members) occupant. There's no way of telling how many people were on the plane nor what size it was.

You are right I can't be sure the family members weren't riding along with the Speaker, although it looks like it to me. Folks with more time that me will figure this out.

[Bob Juch]

This being the carbon hypocrite thread the rebursement is not important, but it seems clear that Pelosi, Jr isn't paying fair market rates for private jet service.

Please show me where anything proves he was the sole (or with family members) occupant. There's no way of telling how many people were on the plane nor what size it was.

You are right I can't be sure the family members weren't riding along with the Speaker, although it looks like it to me. Folks with more time that me will figure this out.

You also can't be sure the plane had 120 people in it.

[mrkelley23]

Anybody remember the old comic strip "People unclear on the concept?"

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

Judicial Watch the organization that made the FOI requests referenced above believes the Speaker was on these flights.

Mr. Ross,

We saw your analysis of the recent Pelosi flight documents Judicial Watch obtained from the Air Force.

Double-checking, we found documents we obtained last year on this issue. The other documents seem to show that the Speaker was on most if not all of the flights in question.

Of course, there are legitimate criticisms for her flying her “dependent” forty-something son and other family members around via luxury jets for coach rates, but it looks like she was, at least, on the flights with them.

[snomaim]

Judicial Watch the organization that made the FOI requests referenced above believes the Speaker was on these flights.

Mr. Ross,

We saw your analysis of the recent Pelosi flight documents Judicial Watch obtained from the Air Force.

Double-checking, we found documents we obtained last year on this issue. The other documents seem to show that the Speaker was on most if not all of the flights in question.

Of course, there are legitimate criticisms for her flying her “dependent” forty-something son and other family members around via luxury jets for coach rates, but it looks like she was, at least, on the flights with them.

Judicial Watch is not the most credible organization out there.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

Judicial Watch the organization that made the FOI requests referenced above believes the Speaker was on these flights.

Mr. Ross,

We saw your analysis of the recent Pelosi flight documents Judicial Watch obtained from the Air Force.

Double-checking, we found documents we obtained last year on this issue. The other documents seem to show that the Speaker was on most if not all of the flights in question.

Of course, there are legitimate criticisms for her flying her “dependent” forty-something son and other family members around via luxury jets for coach rates, but it looks like she was, at least, on the flights with them.

Judicial Watch is not the most credible organization out there.

I supposed based on what you say that perhaps the Speaker was in fact having her family members flown across the country when she wasn't on the Jet, and Judicial Watch is just covering for her.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

Huffintgton Post lambasts Facebook, ignores NCAR Wyoming Supercomputer project

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-ke ... 69830.html

Facebook, one of the fastest growing and most innovative destinations on the web, recently announced a plan to build a massive data center in Prineville, Oregon. Unfortunately, while Facebook plans to build a highly energy-efficient data center, which saves it money in lower energy costs, the company has taken the cheap and easy -- not to mention dirty -- way out in choosing coal as the source of electricity that will power your Facebook profile.


Yes, coal -- that 19th century technology, which happens to be the dirtiest source of energy and biggest contributor to global warming -- will be burned in ever greater amounts with each photo shared and status update posted, unless Facebook changes its plans.

[franktangredi]

Are people making plans for the first birthday of this thread? It's only eight days away!

I'm not sure which is more appropriate: a cake and candles, or a wooden stake and mallet.