Dedicated to the balanced discussion of global warming
Steve McIntyre of Climate Audit(one of the MMs of the Climategate emails) recently published an analysis and history of the “trick” that was accomplished and discussed in the “stolen” emails from the CRU of East Anglia. I encourage you to jump over to Steve’s article to read the full analysis but I would like to include a few paragraphs here in the hope that you will want more information that Steve supplies.
Much recent attention has been paid to the email about the “trick” and the effort to “hide the decline”. Climate scientists have complained that this email has been taken “out of context”. In this case, I’m not sure that it’s in their interests that this email be placed in context because the context leads right back to a meeting of IPCC authors in Tanzania, raising serious questions about the role of IPCC itself in “hiding the decline” in the Briffa reconstruction.
If you haven’t read the Summary for Policymakers for the most recent IPCC report, you can download it here. I encourage all of my readers to take the time to read this entire document (it is only a couple dozen pages and is not a difficult read. Remember the target audience is law makers so it has to be kept at a basic reading level (yes, that is my sarcasm coming out).READ MORE
I think that the work here is quite interesting and it only further draws to question if we know enough to make any real suggestions. In my opinion, there is simply too much that we do not understand about our climate to form the opinion of the IPCC. They would have been better to recommend major investments in data gathering and climate modeling technology rather than scare the world’s public by proclaiming a cause and effect.
When one converts the units, this means that the Earth’s climate system should be accumulating Joules at a rate of 2.61*10**22 Joules per year [0.98*10**22 Joules to 3.91*10*22 Joules per year] in 2005…..The data, however, show quite a different accumulation of Joules in recent years, and in 2005 in particular.
BBC News – February 2, 2007
Summary of IPCC findings.
Global climate change is “very likely” to have been human-induced, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has concluded.
* It is very likely that human activities are causing global warming
* Probable temperature rise by the end of the century will be between 1.8C and 4C (3.2-7.2F)
* Possible temperature rise by the end of the century ranges between 1.1C and 6.4C (2-11.5F)
* Sea levels are likely to rise by 28-43cm
* Arctic summer sea ice is likely to disappear in second half of century
* It is very likely that parts of the world will see an increase in the number of heatwaves
Bill Nye ‘The Science Guy’ was on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow show this past Wednesday, discussing the latest round of snowstorms and if climate change is responsible. Nye told Maddow that the people who are saying that the snowstorms around Washington D.C. disproves climate change are almost ‘unpatriotic’.
Nye also said that he felt from his experience that global warming denial could be attributed to generational factors, like his personal observations that older people have a much harder time grasping how billions of people could affect the thin atmosphere. He felt that younger generations are more accepting of this possibility.READ MORE
I don’t know about you but I am beginning to think that no one even read the report from the IPCC in 2007. If you live in the Netherlands, how do you just now realize that your country was incorrectly calculated to be over 50% under sea level.
This report is from Breitbart, you can read the full article there.
The Netherlands has asked the UN climate change panel to explain an inaccurate claim in a landmark 2007 report that more than half the country was below sea level, the Dutch government said Friday.
According to the Dutch authorities, only 26 percent of the country is below sea level, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will be asked to account for its figures, environment ministry spokesman Trimo Vallaart told AFP.
I picked this up at ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Company). There is a lot of talk about Climategate and Glaciergate but now we find a new instance of the IPCC reports that were not based on peer-reviewed scientific information.
Now that the IPCC has admitted one problem, it is obvious that everyone is going to go through every claim with a fine-tooth comb. For the sake of the IPCC, I hope that there aren’t more problems discovered. If there are, then the entire global warming conversation will take a significant move towards skepticism. It is interesting that this is almost precisely the problem that Michael Crichton described in his novel on global warming “A State of Fear” and why he spoke out about the issue of bad scientific discover.READ MORE
An excellent opinion in the Wall Street Journal. It is absolutely amazing that there are so few media companies that try to get the story straight.
Last November, U.N. climate chief Rajendra Pachauri delivered a blistering rebuke to India’s environment minister for casting doubt on the notion that global warming was causing the rapid melting of Himalayan glaciers.
“We have a very clear idea of what is happening,” the chairman of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) told the Guardian newspaper. “I don’t know why the minister is supporting this unsubstantiated research. It is an extremely arrogant statement.”
I am absolutely amazed at the arrogance of Dr. Rajendra Pachauri when he says “It was a collective failure by a number of people. I need to consider what action to take, but that will take several weeks. It’s best to think with a cool head, rather than shoot from the hip.” How can you legitimately say that he is running an international agency that is designed to collate the scientific truth when he says this. He needs to own up to a massive mistake that has caused nations around the world to take massive actions to curb industry.
From Times Online:
The Indian head of the UN climate change panel defended his position yesterday even as further errors were identified in the panel’s assessment of Himalayan glaciers.
Dr. Eduardo Zorita has called for the barring of several of the people who recently had their emails released to the public. Dr. Zorita is not a typical “denier” but rather a paleoclimatologist from GKSS who has published many works within the field. Because I value how Dr. Zorita explains his position I re-publish it here without edit or further editorial comment. I sincerely hope that his fears that “my future studies will, again, not see the light of publication” but I fear that folks that sympathize with people like Mann, Jones and Rahmstorf could, very likely, be very cruel to those that question members of their club.READ MORE