'Climategate:' What a joke

Notice how the agenda-driven journalist censors the fact that the CRU (funded with tens of millions of tax dollars) now claims, in a dog-ate-my-homework moment, that they threw away all the basic climate data they used?

If you believe that, you probably believe the earth is flat.

Please.....

Even if you ignore the emails, which only a fool would do, you can't ignore the comments which have been written directly in to the source code for the climate models. They clearly indicate seeking truth was not what was desired, but rather the goal was to produce a result which met the desired end.

A test: the climate modelers should be given the last 50 years of climate data, put that into their models and run time backwards to see if they can predict the climate (temperature) in 1900, 1850 and 1800.

Please . . .

It is some more nonsense from the ridiculous Republicans, who are shielding their Corporate Sponsors from having to stop the polluting of our earth's atmosphere. Let's just attach this nonsense to their long line of " head-in-the-sand ", perspectives. We'll start with the ignoring of proven Darwinian theory, smoking doesn't kill, like guns don't and lets not forget the fabrication of Weapons of Mass Destruction ! Mission Accomplished ! These are just a few examples of the stellar, intellectual capabilities of our Republican-Libertarian brethren !! The really brightest bulb in their political marque is their voting twice for 2 draft-dodgers, as our President and Vice-President, who ended up, betraying America's ideals and sold us down the river !! Wrap yourself in the American flag, all of you, Republican-Libertarians, in order to hide your miserable behavior, concerning America and all of her citizens !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

The alphabet TV media has not ONE story of this on TV. 2 weeks running . . . The irrelevant decline continues . . . Keep denying science, Silva:
*
"I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline."
*
At least Minnesotan's have a sense of humor. The bald dude is Michael Mann from Penn State.
*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEiLgbBGKVk
*
Here Silva, some done research for you:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/climategate/

It's not the e-mails that are damming, it's the included documentation that the data used to support the research was so cooked and error-filled that the programmers themselves had concluded, "So, we can have a proper result, but only by including a load of garbage! "

It's like finding out years ago that the auditor of Bernie Madoff's $50 Billion fund is 2 guys whose office in a strip mall. It's more than just a red flag.

Scientists Behaving Badly
A corrupt cabal of global warming alarmists are exposed by a massive document leak.
by Steven F. Hayward
12/14/2009, Volume 015, Issue 13

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/017/300ubchn.asp

Slowly and mostly unnoticed by the major news media, the air has been going out of the global warming balloon. Global temperatures stopped rising a few years ago, much to the dismay of the climate campaigners. The U.N.'s upcoming Copenhagen conference--which was supposed to yield a binding greenhouse gas emissions reduction treaty as a successor to the failed Kyoto Protocol--collapsed weeks in advance and remains on life support pending Obama's magical intervention. Cap and trade legislation is stalled on Capitol Hill. Recent opinion polls from Gallup, Pew, Rasmussen, ABC/Washington Post, and other pollsters all find a dramatic decline in public belief in human-caused global warming. The climate campaigners continue to insist this is because they have a "communications" problem, but after Al Gore's Nobel Prize/Academy Award double play, millions of dollars in paid advertising, and the relentless doom-mongering from the media echo chamber and the political class, this excuse is preposterous. And now the climate campaign is having its Emperor's New Clothes moment.

From the National Academy of Sciences, Here is the crux of climategate (assuming the reader is familiar with the FOIA and the "lost" source data aspects of the issue):

Ensuring the Integrity, Accessibility, and
Stewardship of Research Data in the Digital Age

ISBN: 978-0-309-13684-6 National Academy of Sciences.

http://www.nap.edu/html/12615/12615_EXS.pdf

Data Access and Sharing Principle: Research data, methods, and other information integral to publicly reported results should be publicly accessible.

Recommendation 5: All researchers should make research data, methods, and other information integral to their publicly reported results publicly accessible in a timely manner to allow verification of published findings and to enable other researchers to build on published results, except in unusual cases in which there are compelling reasons for not releasing data. In these cases, researchers should explain in a publicly accessible
manner why the data are being withheld from release.

Data Stewardship Principle: Research data should be retained to serve future uses.

Data that may have long-term value should be documented, referenced, and indexed so that others can find and use them accurately and appropriately. Curating data requires documenting, referencing, and indexing the data so that they can be used accurately and appropriately in the future.

Recommendation 9: Researchers should establish data management plans at the beginning of each research project that include appropriate provisions for the stewardship of research data.

I claim no conspiracy. Never attribute to conspiracy what one can attribute to incompetence or pettiness.

After two weeks, the SWAMP's first story on ClimateGate quotes that great newsman Jonathan Leibowitz (Mr. Stewart's real name). Couldn't get an interview with AlGore? Why is it that AlGore isn't going to Copehagen?

This pretty much sums up Michael Mann's and Phil Jones' data research

http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/012722.html

As for the snow in Houston, Leibowitz is correct that it has no statistical significance. Then again, 30 years of global warming has no statistical significance on a planet that is over 300,000,000 years old.

There is fraud being uncovered by the e-mails, and it occurs at other universities. See Watts Up With That:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/01/climategate-grows-to-include-other-research-institutions/

Climate/Climategate Updates
Part One

. . . U.N. to Probe Climategate Leaks: The ever-watchful folk at the United Nations, the same folk who have perpetrated the whole fraud of anthropogenic global warming, have now decided to investigate the matter.

Said investigation will not focus on why the U.N. has for decades persisted in propagating the patent falsehood of evil mankind causing climate change with our greenhouse gas emissions.

Rather, the Chairman of the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Dr. Rahendra Pachauri, reflecting some Brit diction, has declared, “We will certainly go into the whole lot and then we will take a position on it. We certainly don’t want to brush anything under the carpet.”

Why anyone would believe that Pachauri or his henchmen at the United Nations would even think of under-the-carpet brushing is mystifying.

After all, pinning climate change on the industrial world, principally on the United States, has only been a prime raison d’être for the U.N. in its quest to level the playing field and sharing the planet’s (America’s) wealth with the Third World. . .

(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1358)

You guys can try and deny it all you want, but the AGW scam has now, at long last, been exposed. The e-mails aren't even the problem, although in and of themselves they should be enough to make any fair-minded person question anything that's ever come out of the CRU.

No, the real problem the warmbots have right now is the jumbled state of the data itself and the sorry code used to analyze and blatantly manipulate it in order to produce a pre-determined outcome.

I don't expect the "We're melting the planet!" crowd to ever admit they were wrong. You've invested far too much of yourselves emotionally in the debate to ever entertain that thought. That would be like asking the Pope to convert to Islam. But it doesn't matter.

What DOES matter is that now the general public is finally seeing the other side of the story and is beginning to ask questions like ...

* How can you guys explain the fact that global temperatures have flattened out and actually dropped over the past 10 years despite the fact that CO2 levels have continued to rise?

* Why is it that at certain times in the Earth's distant past, atmospheric CO2 levels were 10 to 15 times greater than they are today and yet planetary temperatures back then were only marginally higher than they are now?

* How is it possible that there were healthy polar ice caps during those time periods when, if planetary temperature levels were as sensitive to atmospheric CO2 concentrations as the climate change models of the CRU and the IPCC would have us believe, there shouldn't have been so much as an ice cube left anywhere on the face of the Earth?

* How can you explain the fact that changes in atmospheric CO2 levels have actually lagged changes in global temperature, sometimes by hundreds of years when, according to anthropogenic global warming theory, they should lead them?

* What about the fact that temperatures may have actually been higher in the Middle Ages than they are now? There weren't any SUV's around back then as far as I know, and yet Viking explorers around the 10th century saw fit to name their new home "Greenland," presumably because it was green at the time. The only way Greenland could have been green was if it was warmer than it is now. (No wonder Michael Mann and others went to so much trouble to try and fudge the data from this period.)

* What about recent observations from the Earth's exosphere which indicate that radiation levels there are increasing when global warming theory would require that they be decreasing as more energy is trapped in the lower atmosphere by increased CO2?

* Why is the amount of ice on the antarctic ice sheet increasing and not decreasing?

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Global-Warming/Antarctic-ice-growing-not-shrinking-/articleshow/4418558.cms

* How do you explain the fact that the ice sheet between Canada and Greenland is now thicker than it has been than at any point in the last 15 years?

* Most importantly, how is it possible that a change in the composition of the Earth's atmosphere equal to just 8/1000ths of 1 percent can, in and of itself, cause planetary temperatures to rise? Ice core samples show that for the past 400,000 years, atmospheric CO2 levels have fluctuated between 200 parts per million (ppm) and 300 ppm. CO2 is now at 380 ppm. So what's got everybody so worked up is this increase of 80 ppm over historic limits, right?

Well, 80 divided by 1,000,000 equals 0.00008. Converted to percentage terms, that's 0.008%, or 8/1000ths of 1 percent.

Instead of trying to provide answers to these and other legitimate questions, the warmists have simply chosen to deride those asking them as "flat-earthers" "deniers" or "stooges for Big Oil".

Well, that ain't gonna fly any more. The onus is now firmly on the AGW lobby to tell us why, in the face of evidence that's this flimsy and that has obviously been fraudulently doctored, we and other nations should consent to the imposition of billions of dollars of additional costs each year in a misguided attempt to address a "problem" that doesn't even exist.

The truth is that this has never been about science. It's always been about money, power and ideology. Well, the jig is up and cap & trade is now dead for the forseable future, perhaps forever.

Hallelujah!!! The truth shall set you free!!!

My my my. What would the Big Oil companies do (the ones who get rich off of being able to pollute and kill people) if they didn't have a bunch of dumbass Republcan rubes doing their dirty work for them?

The emails at the heart of SwiftHack were obtained from the Climatic Research Unit of a British university, and the basic conclusions of that university's work have been independently corroborated by three sets of American and Japanese researchers. So these Republican "complaints" amount to throwing out the baby because bathwater on the other side of the pond might be -- but really isn't -- contaminated.
-
http://enviroknow.com/2009/11/25/climategate-the-swifthack-scandal-what-you-need-to-know/
-

Wow, how did I know that Mark Silva would write such tripe about Climategate? Course, last week I produced multiple links to scientists, climatologists, images of ice caps, temperature charts for the Antarctic and Mark Silva denied all of that. What a Warmer, Mark is. I mean, he even ignores and discards the history of the planet's own warming and cooling cycles and the fact there was a Little Ice Age from the mid 1300s to the mid 1800s, which cause things like famine and plagues.
Yo, Marky the Warmer, if you feel so strongly that the "human spewing of megatonnage of carbon into the atmosphere" is causing global warming and we're all going to die and drown with in the next 50 to 100 years, then why don't you stop driving a car, no longer take transportation of any kind (bicycles included because they have to manufactured), no longer fly anyway for work (just tell your Trib bosses that you don't want to contribute flying anywhere because of the plane's harm to the atmosphere), stop heating and cooling your home, no more lights too, and YOU MUST get rid of your computer because computers are one of the most egregious users of energy. Oh, that means no refrigerator either. Oh and no food too. We all know the methane produced by cows is bad. And the farmers have to use tractors to get those veggies, so no veggies for you. You do all of that, and then come back and talk to us about the evils of mankind and how we're causing the planet to warm unnaturally.

Actually, we can heat our homes just fine, refrigerate and cook our food as well, and we can do it with the help of some wind power and solar power in the grid, curtailing the amount of coal refuse released into the air we breathe. My car's running at pretty high mpg, and I'll be happy to take another more efficient one when it's available -- what manner of hog are you turning over in the mornng there, JD? And yes, we're all going to die within the next 50 to 100 years. You guys with your heads in the sand may run out of air first though.

AS the BBC reports, even the UN is demanding an investigation:

“The head of the UN’s climate science body says claims that UK scientists manipulated data on global warming should be investigated. . . . Dr Pachauri told BBC Radio 4’s The Report programme that the claims were serious and he wants them investigated. . . . Jonathon Porritt, the former chairman of the UK Sustainable Development Commission, called the developments ‘very worrying’ because the row threatened to undermine the integrity of the IPCC. ‘Without that integrity, politicians cannot necessarily trust what the scientists have been telling them,’ he warned.”

It appears the only person who denies there's a problem with the data is Mark Silva.

"that includes talk of combating the arguments of climate-change skeptics, harsh words for those skeptics, exclusion of scientists with contrarian views on the matter and destruction of data that might undermine evidence of global warming."

The e-mails between the leading climate researchers of our time detail a perversion of the peer-review process including getting an editor fired, detail the method used to delete the last 4 decades of the tree-ring data, used to produce the famously false "Hockey Stick" graph and replace it with thermometer records showing the warming the tree ring data did not show, detail the garbage-filled temperature records which have now been destroyed, detailing their plan to avoid FOI Act requests, and worse. Phil Jones has been forced to step down. Michael Mann is being investigated by Penn State.

Spin away, Mr. Silva. The cat is out of the bag now...

Michael Moon
Chicago, IL

The problem with the discovered CRU emails, (which I pointed to last Sat here and was, well, ignored), is two fold. One, most Governments around the world are developing their climate policies on the CRU research that is now exposed as numbers cooking by the CRU. And two, none of the national broadcast stations or publications are even reporting this serious breach of science ethics. It even took Mark here almost 2 weeks to mention it.
No warmers will ever convince skeptics to get onboard while those two points are hanging in the wind.

Silva,

If you think windmills are such a great idea, put one on your house - just like the farmers did 100 years ago and see how much electricity you generate.

What do you think of more nukes? IF the left was really serious about reducing the carbon footprint, nukes would be the keystone. Wind and solar cannot be counted on for baseload electricty, unless you what to constantly turing your peaking facilities on and off

Mark, do you know that wind power is one of the most inefficient and expensive types of energy out there? And what about the damage those wind turbines do to the environment? They do kill millions upon millions of song birds a year. The carnage on the ground by the wind turbines is stunning.

And, Mark, I have a nice fuel efficient 2009 Nissan Sentra that I'm driving. Thanks for asking.

"Come back and talk to us about the evils of mankind and how we're causing the planet to warm unnaturally." You provide this invaluable service to the Swamp, sometimes three times in one post:
Al Gore: making millions upon million of dollars hoodwinking the masses with the corrupt media's help.
Al Gore: flies internationally not on ocmmercial jets transporting hundreds at a time, but on private jets, causing more harm to the environment.
Al Gore: learned the art of lying and distortion from his one-time bosses, the Clintons, the Bonnie and Clyde of American politics.
Posted by: John D | March 27, 2008 3:48 PM
How could he be a hoodwinking liar and hurting the environment at the same time...? The Swamps renowned climatologist Johnny Duracell (google it), would know:
"The Arctic: completely frozen over." He will be here in December http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nasa-to-spotlight-shrinking-arctic-sea-ice-and-unprecedented-glacier-study-at-copenhagen-78556032.html presenting under State of the Science: Earth's Changing Polar Ice Cover. Meanwhile, the polar bears continue to adapt http://www.freakingnews.com/Surfung-Pictures-34160.asp

And the solar panels are frying the honeybees, right? That Sentra got a moonroof? Careful you dont get moonburn.

Oh. They compiled their intelligence much like the Iraq al-qaeda WMD intelligence. So glad we put that cherry picked pile of hoohoo in context. At least, we knew there was a slight possibility it was...true, and very much worth the extraneous effort.

This has always been a big joke, however the joke is on the people that bought into this nonsense in the first place. Let's see, about twenty years ago we were going to enter a cold age, we had global cooling. This has all been a big scam on the American public to push Gorematics and make he and his companies 100's of millions of dollars, talk about a snake oil salesman, this guy is at the top of the list. I can not believe these people have enough of the public believing this drivel. We have been keeping weather records for about 150 years or so, while the planet has been here for millions of years, now all of a sudden Gore and the Dems are experts?. Wake up people your being had!.

Swamp Scoreborad

John D - 2

Silva - 0 - as usual

Gentlemen let's not confuse Mark Silva with the facts. He has too much invested with his media pals to give an objective assessment at this point. Let's let him gracefully drift into irrelevancy.

Global Warming
Now... Climate Change

That says it all. They needed a new slogan because the falling temps conflict with their ideological view point.

I am one of the amateur sleuths that posts on oil depletion blogs such as TheOilDrum.com. I take a beating for trying to inject some science into analyzing how depletion will play out, with my fellow analysts asserting that hand-waving suffices to convince people of the seriousness of peak oil. What the whole climategate brouhaha clearly spells out, is that the business as usual crowd will go after Peak Oil next. All they need to look for is some perceived scientific failing to nitpick against, and doubts will set in. Perhaps unfortunate, but we just need to be more diligent.

Oh, Mark, solar panels don't hurt the honey bee. I know you are incredibly adverse to the facts, but here ya go bud:

http://www.physorg.com/news114165881.html

http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2009/02/26/wind-turbines-mean-trouble-for-birds-bats/

And here is a little something about the polar ice caps and temperatures with analysis by a SCIENTIST!!!!!

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Scientists_Counter_Latest_Arctic.pdf

Anyway, as happens every year, the Arctic does melt some over the summer and early Fall. But then winter sets in and by the middle of winter, it freezes over again!!

Silva, let's say you are a scientist, I know it's a stretch, but let's pretend anyway. You do years and years of research, say with 40 years of data on how biased newspapers control the democrat's brains; thereby making it impossible for them to think rationally. You publish your work and now you are ready to take it public. The only thing is, your momma's basement got full of your junk and she tossed all your life's work in the trash. Guess what? You are back at square one. Your "science" is nothing without being able to show a fellow scientist exactly how you came to your conclusion...sorry Mark, back to the drawing board.

There is a method that real scientists use to "do scientific research." It involves a method of record keeping so that IF you discover something you can reproduce it, not only you but any other scientist using the same method will have the same results. And you can prove your research, etc. Well, when you fundamentally violate that VERY BASIC rule of scientific research, your research is NO LONGER SCIENCE. NO LONGER SCIENCE. GET IT, NO LONGER SCIENCE. When you throw away your data, no one can check your work, AND YOU ARE NO LONGER A SCIENTIST. That's what these guys did. They threw away their data, no scientist would ever do that, ever.

Anyhow, as happens every year, some bengal tigers die between summer and fall. But then winter sets in and by the middle of spring, they reproduce!!! Endangered my moma. You make it so easy John D, how can I be more like you?! I was so concerned about this little map, but you make science so clear! http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/qthinice.asp Have you decided on what you will do with your WWF membership now that those losers are looking to waste their funds in researching the impact climate change has on polar bears and their icy habitat? I don't like my monies mixin with no stinkin polar bear fraud.

I don't like my monies mixin with no stinkin polar bear fraud.

Posted by: Chip | December 5, 2009 9:58 PM

Oh, you mean like the fake Shot of the polar bears on the ice floe? Or do you mean the one Al Gore used of computer generated fake video?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/04/22/abc-s-20-20-gore-used-fictional-film-clip-inconvenient-truth

Climate/Climategate Updates Part Two

Despite all the damning revelations out of Britain’s East Anglia University, the belly of the global warming conspiracy, COP15, the United Nations’ international climate summit in Copenhagen, will go on as planned.

With President Obama, the twenty-first century’s answer to the indecisive Hamlet, tossing his hat into the climate cesspool, previously-dashed hopes for any successful agreements at COP15 have been resuscitated: http://bit.ly/8kzkhh

Glory be!

That means that the U.N. may yet seduce the United States into agreeing to devastating deals that will benefit the Third World and decimate American industry all because of the proven charade of global warming.

And now for some much needed levity in this miasma:

. Comedy Central’s Resident News Clown: For some inexplicable reason, Jon Stewart, nee’ Jon Leibowitz, is accepted by many as a news source when this clown’s news credibility is a few steps beneath that of George Stephanopoulis’.

Stewart recently performed some amazing mental gymnastics on “The Daily Show,” ridiculing the secretive, criminal actions of the warmist scientists at UEA then, without missing a step, he segued into ripping those who termed the mess that is Climategate.

As we all well know, Earth is inexorably becoming a cauldron.

See Stewart’s act here but especially note the comments on Swamppolitics.com which carried the story.

The commenters show far more astuteness, erudition, and sheer common sense than Stewart and handily refute his futile efforts at resorting to a reductio ad absurdum attack on Climategate: http://bit.ly/7iR9sI

Head for them Thar San Fran Hills!: Austrian-born body-builder, actor of sorts, hubby of a Kennedy, governor of the former great State of Caleeforniah, Arnold Swartzernegger, must be watching too many cataclysm flicks.

He began . . .

(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1359)

According to Comiso's study, when compared to longer term ground-based surface temperature data, the rate of warming in the Arctic over the last 20 years is eight times the rate of warming over the last 100 years.
.
Comiso's study also finds temperature trends vary by region and season. While warming is prevalent over most of the Arctic, some areas, such as Greenland, appear to be cooling. Springtimes arrived earlier and were warmer, and warmer autumns lasted longer, the study found. Most importantly, temperatures increased on average by 1.22 degrees Celsius per decade over sea ice during Arctic summer. The summer warming and lengthened melt season appears to be affecting the volume and extent of permanent sea ice. Annual trends, which were not quite as strong, ranged from a warming of 1.06 degrees Celsius over North America to a cooling of .09 degrees Celsius in Greenland.
.
The surface temperature records covering from 1981 to 2001 were obtained through thermal infrared data from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration satellites.
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2003/1023esuice.html
.
For the perennial ice to recover, sustained cooling is needed, especially during the summer period. This has not been the case over the last 20 years, as the satellite data show a warming trend in the Arctic, and it is not likely to be the case in the future, as climate models predict continued Arctic warming.
.
Even if sea ice retreated a lot one summer, it would make a comeback the following winter, since temperatures below freezing generally cause at least a thin layer of ice to form," explains Florence Fetterer, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Program Manager at NSIDC. "But in the winter of 2004-2005, sea ice didn't approach the previous wintertime level."
.
However, "the system does have negative feedbacks as well," cautions Claire Parkinson, senior scientist at GSFC. "For instance, the reduced sea ice coverage will lead to more wintertime heat loss from the ocean to the atmosphere and perhaps therefore to colder water temperatures and further ice growth."
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2005/arcticice_decline.html
.
The maximum amount of sea ice in the Arctic winter has fallen by six percent over each of the last two winters, as compared to a loss of merely 1.5 percent per decade on average annually since the earliest satellite monitoring in 1979. This is happening as summer sea ice continues its retreat at an average of ten percent per decade.
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2006/seaice_meltdown.html
.
Arctic sea ice coverage appears to have reached its lowest extent for the year and the second-lowest amount recorded since the dawn of the satellite era, according to observations from the NASA-supported National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado in Boulder.
.
While slightly above the record-low minimum set Sept. 16, 2007, this season further reinforces the strong negative trend in summer sea ice extent observed during the past 30 years. Before last year, the previous record low for September was 2005.
.
In March, when the Arctic reached its annual maximum sea ice coverage during the winter, scientists from NASA and the data center reported that thick, older sea ice was continuing to decline. According to NASA-processed satellite microwave data, this perennial ice used to cover 50-60 percent of the Arctic, but this winter it covered less than 30 percent. Perennial sea ice is the long-lived layer of ice that remains even when the surrounding short-lived seasonal sea ice melts to its minimum extent during the summer.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/sea_ice_nsidc.html
.
July 07, 2009
PASADENA, Calif. - Arctic sea ice thinned dramatically between the winters of 2004 and 2008, with thin seasonal ice replacing thick older ice as the dominant type for the first time on record. The new results, based on data from a NASA Earth-orbiting spacecraft, provide further evidence for the rapid, ongoing transformation of the Arctic's ice cover.
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2009-107

Posted by: Terry | December 5, 2009 5:35 PM

Silva,

If you think windmills are such a great idea, put one on your house - just like the farmers did 100 years ago and see how much electricity you generate.

What do you think of more nukes? IF the left was really serious about reducing the carbon footprint, nukes would be the keystone. Wind and solar cannot be counted on for baseload electricty, unless you what to constantly turing your peaking facilities on and off
__________________________

We have been lowing our homes' foot-print over time. New windows, doors, & tank-less water heater. Next is a small Vertical Axis Wind Turbine. We have been looking at them for 4 years. Do not get me wrong we do not buy all the crap Al Gore and Michael Mann have been putting out. Its just the little things people can do that help to. Plus in the long term you save money. Take the tank-less water heater, they cost more up front to buy & install but, it has paid for it self in under three years. Before the new water heater our winter gas bill would be near $200. now its under $100. most months and in the summer we pay more in fees then for gas used.

It seems that the majority of the posters on this blog are addicted to " coke ", as in coal. How unfortunate, to have one's mind, here you get the benefit of the doubt, to have your mind altered by the use of cheap energy. Electric toothbrushes, electric lawnmowers, hair-driers, carving knives, hedge-trimmers, air-conditioned sports stadiums, to name a few in an endless list of non-essentials that contribute to the choking of life on this planet. The same people, who worshipped the Weasels of Wall Street, that caused President Obama to seek stimuluses and bailouts are now screaming about their children's future, because of the deficits, yet, pay no mind to the disaster that awaits our children, when it comes to the life of our planet. They can care less. They can not even conceive of the idea of, erring on the side of caution. That is how short-sighted, greedy and block-headed they have become. Thank God, not all Americans practice the " head-in-the-sand ' philosophy, some of us actually think, given our great record of achievement in the past, can solve this problem, without denying it !! So, let's get to work and solve this problem and if that means that Corporate America foots the bill, than that is the way it will be. That is the least they can do, for enjoying the fruits of the worker's labor, living high off the hog, for all of these centuries !! Give a little back, Corporate America, or you will rue the day that you allowed greed to run and ruin your lives.
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

The biggest joke is Obimbo going to fly over their at taxpayers expense and make one of his Big Teleprompter speeches, what an enviroment waste of fuel, but he has to be the big Mesiah.

As a recent article in Forbes points out, 30 years ago some of the same magazines and scientists now pushing the warming alarmism were pushing global COOLING.

"Many of you are too young to remember, but in 1975 our government pushed "the coming ice age."

Random House dutifully printed "THE WEATHER CONSPIRACY … coming of the New Ice Age." This may be the only book ever written by 18 authors. All 18 lived just a short sled ride from Washington, D.C. Newsweek fell in line and did a cover issue warning us of global cooling on April 28, 1975. And The New York Times, Aug. 14, 1976, reported "many signs that Earth may be headed for another ice age."
OK, you say, that's media. But what did our rational scientists say?

In 1974, the National Science Board announced: "During the last 20 to 30 years, world temperature has fallen, irregularly at first but more sharply over the last decade. Judging from the record of the past interglacial ages, the present time of high temperatures should be drawing to an end…leading into the next ice age."
.....
You can't blame these scientists for sucking up to the fed's mantra du jour. Scientists live off grants.

Science's prediction of "A full-blown, 10,000 year ice age," came from its March 1, 1975 issue. The Christian Science Monitor observed that armadillos were retreating south from Nebraska to escape the "global cooling" in its Aug. 27, 1974 issue.

That armadillo caveat seems reminiscent of today's tales of polar bears drowning due to glaciers disappearing."

I am appalled at the snide snarky remarks here, both in the original article and in the comments section. Just appalled.

Mark, I have not kept up that much with the brouhahahaha over the emails, but I have read enough to think (note I did not say "know," because I don't) that it seems scientists were so interested in getting a certain conclusion that they ignored data (and in some cases falsified, perhaps? I'm not sure of that point) that didn't support their desired outcome. If we're convening a worldwide summit, and the data being used to try to come up with solutions is false, isn't that a problem?

OK loony lib simpletons, let's try this another way:

The smartest kid in the class (CRU) just got caught cheating. Why are his frat brothers (GISS, NOAA) claiming that everything is ok? Because they all put down the same answers on the test.

If CRU takes the real data and adds fudge.dat, then aren’t they all just selling different flavors of fudge?

It turns out the CRU has been caught with weapons of math destruction in their code. Get it?
===========
Oh, and how's that carbon footprint working out for you? Oh wait, do as I say, not as I do:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6736517/Copenhagen-climate-summit-1200-limos-140-private-planes-and-caviar-wedges.html
==============
And for the intelligent scientific reader (likely few libs):
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/12/understanding_climategates_hid.html
====
Enjoy!!! Should be more rewarding than the Bears game!

Crooks,

We have done similar things at our house, but not for the phoney-baloney reason of Man-Made Global Warming, but because it makes economic sense.

I want ot see this hypocrits go all green first on their own house and see how they live.

Oh yeah! Just like that bean-stuffed polar bear flown to the ice floe made of recycled Styrofoam cups. The only known documentation of a bear on an ice floe of it's kind known to man, in and out of theaters near me. Let's not forget, the four-year-in-the-making, most expensive nature documentary commissioned by the BBC Natural History Unit, "Planet Earth," calved into the film "earth" following the lives of three animal families; depicting a polar bear swimming through rapidly melting habitat just to die on a an island filled with a flown-in cardboard walrus colony, in computer-generated exhaustion. Movies are the only place I get my science news from, like all the warmers. Gotta keep up on the competition, and wait for the first sign of victory in a crack the size of me pinky. Who do they think they're kidding trying to simulate what is observed and documented by scientists by showing me circus bear in a movie! A polar bear fraud until I see every last polar bear filmed live uninterrupted for at least 30,0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years in the comfort of my own Muslim nuclear fall-out shelter It's the only way. They can report, I decide!

I'm tired of these tired old arguments about who's science is the purest. I just want us to keep the planet clean because it's the right thing to do. I remember when that river started on fire because of all of the crap the chemical companies dumped into it. How about Love Canal? Anyone remember those people and what they went through? That is the reason we should keep the land, air, and water clean.

Don Fitzgerald in Illinois, come on down! Since you're the only one that agrees with Mark Silva's isiotic posting, you win the prize: two tons of carbon allowances!

How dare you "republican/libertarians" hijack Mark Silva's blog to talk facts! That's not what the purpose here. The purpose of Mark Silva's posts are to give the 'party line.' And don't you forget it! oh, and . . .

Please!

Was this a "News Article" in the Swamp? Or was it an opinion piece? Sounds like a party line masquerading as a news piece. This is a news item with 2 sides. Please just report the news...

Yet, Arctic sea ice continues to dwindle—as do glaciers across the globe; average temperatures have increased by 0.7 degree Celsius in the past century and the last decade is the warmest in the instrumental record; spring has sprung forward, affecting everything from flower blossoms to animal migrations; and the concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases continue to rise, reaching 387 parts per million in 2009, a rise of 30 percent since 1750.
.
As for charges that the CRU database is corrupt or compromised such that its results cannot be trusted, Schmidt noted that a number of other databases with climate records supporting global warming exist throughout the world—including NASA's GISS, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center and even the IPCC, all of which provide access to the raw data. Further, many of the same contrarians arguing that global warming has stopped in recent years are relying on the same CRU record that they are now disparaging as untrustworthy.
.
The stolen e-mails may ultimately provide a sociological window into the workings of the scientific community. "This is a record of how science is actually done," Schmidt noted. "They'll see that scientists are human and how science progresses despite human failings. They'll see why science as an enterprise works despite the fact that scientists aren't perfect."
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=scientists-respond-to-climategate-controversy
*
Carbon dioxide levels climbing toward a doubling of the 280 parts per million (ppm) concentration found in the preindustrial atmosphere pose the question: What impact will this increased greenhouse gas load have on the climate? If relatively small changes in CO2 levels have big effects—meaning that we live in a more sensitive climate system—the planet could warm by as much as 6 degrees Celsius on average with attendant results such as changed weather patterns and sea-level rise. A less sensitive climate system would mean average warming of less than 2 degrees C and, therefore, fewer ramifications from global warming.
*
The researchers first matched this fossil record secured by the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Expedition in the western tropical Pacific to existing records from bubbles trapped in Antarctic ice cores that stretch back 800,000 years, which preserve a precise record of past atmospheric composition. Thus reassured of the technique's accuracy, they plunged back into deep geologic time.
*
"Modern-day levels of carbon dioxide were last reached about 15 million years ago," Tripati says, when sea levels were at least 25 meters higher and temperatures were at least 3 degrees C warmer on average. "During the middle Miocene, an [epoch] in Earth's history when carbon dioxide levels were sustained at values similar to what they are today [330 to 500 ppm], the planet was much warmer, sea level was higher, there was substantially less ice at the poles, and the distribution of rainfall was very different."
*
Further, "at no time in the last 20 million years have levels of carbon dioxide increased as rapidly as at present," Tripati adds; CO2 concentrations have climbed from 280 ppm to 387 ppm in the past 200 years. And "our work indicates that moderate changes in carbon dioxide levels of 100 to 200 parts per million were associated with major climate transitions and large changes in temperature"—indicative of a very sensitive climate.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-sensitive-is-climate-to-carbon-dioxide
*
"So climate scientists have devised means to measure variations in such ubiquitous materials as lake sediments, boreholes, ice cores, and tree rings to evaluate past temperature trends."* Coral and ocean sediment, too.
*
Scientists using mud and rocks from far below the equatorial Pacific ocean floor are uncovering details about the climate history on Earth. The sediment layers recovered from six drilling locations act like pages from a book, and record inch-by-inch Earth’s climate history. The two month long expedition succeeded in obtaining records ranging from the present to the warmest sustained “greenhouse” period on Earth around 53 million years ago. Then, alligators lived as far north as the Arctic, and palm trees existed in the Rocky Mountains. Reconstructions showed that there were no significant polar ice caps, and greenhouse gas concentrations were several times higher than today.
*
The super-greenhouse early Eocene was followed by gradual cooling and the sudden buildup of major ice caps on Antarctica around 34 million years ago, leaving its mark in the equatorial sediment cores the scientists are bringing back to Hawaii. The voyage discovered the effect of large-scale climatic changes on the oceans of the past. Fifty-three million years ago, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was much higher than today, and made the ocean much more acidic, such that only little carbonate is preserved in sediments recovered from those times. In contrast, during the buildup of ice on Antarctica, the ocean became less acidic very rapidly, and more carbonate was very suddenly preserved in the deep ocean. The transition from warm to cool climates took place in less than 100,000 years – well within the time span that humans have been living on our planet.
*
The JOIDES Resolution is a research vessel with unique capabilities for exploring and monitoring the subseafloor; it operates as part of the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP). IODP is supported by two lead agencies, the U.S. National Science Foundation and Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology. Additional program support comes from the European Consortium for Ocean Research Drilling (ECORD), India (Ministry of Earth Sciences), the People’s Republic of China (Ministry of Science and Technology), the Republic of Korea (Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources), Australia and New Zealand (Australian–New Zealand IODP Consortium). The U.S. Implementing Organization (USIO) for IODP is comprised of Texas A&M University, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, and the Consortium for Ocean Leadership. The JOIDES Resolution is now poised to help IODP continue to push the envelope of science by collecting unique subseafloor samples and data that would otherwise remain out of reach to researchers.
http://www.iodp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=473&Itemid=1112
*
And, science continues to work and innovate in the face of challenges as the wabbits slander the whole with the few.
*
Isotope analysis allows researchers to conduct their work using a smaller sample size than needed when trying to re-construct temperature records using tree ring width. Porter explains that the width of rings can vary considerably between trees even when they are growing in the same stand. This variation can complicate reconstructions of past climate.
*
A number of factors influence ring size, including the age of the tree and the location of the tree within the forest. Older trees tend to have smaller rings than younger trees. And trees within the same area might not all receive the same amount of light, nutrients or even water.
*
"Growth is controlled by many things . . . they (trees) can all end up just a little bit different," says Porter.
*
Isotope signals, on the other hand, are often very similar between trees.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091203141935.htm

Posted by: Terry | December 6, 2009 12:13 PM

Crooks,

We have done similar things at our house, but not for the phoney-baloney reason of Man-Made Global Warming, but because it makes economic sense.

I want ot see this hypocrits go all green first on their own house and see how they live.
______________________________

You got it. Its the little things that add up big time. Just look at the stimulus, for less then 2.5 billion they could install tank-less water heaters in every home. For a little less then 20 billion they can install small Vertical Axis Wind Turbine on every home. Seeing how we have three new plants here (would need more) making small Vertical Axis Wind Turbine, how many jobs right there. Then all the installers needed for both the heaters and turbines. Real long term jobs. And with today's tech no need for on site storage. Power not used in the home is put into the grid. With the heaters think of the savings in NG alone. Its does not take a trillion plus dollars stimulus for tens of thousands of jobs. I could do it with under 25 billion and have a pay off in the trillions. But. I'm not in DC and its to easy.

Flatliners,

Try some science

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html

How's that Bruce? I would think that of all you'd be the first to point out who was doing the alarming at the time. Magazines being the word there, not scientists.

The Deniars have absolutely frickin’ nailed it. The Deniars, that would be Bruce, Bobby Mobbie, James, Terry, S. Chan, Berlet 98, Danram, John D, Michael Moon, MAJMark, Paul, Jon, Free To Watch, beth, Chip, and Son Of Liberty. A stake driven straight through to the heart. Today, there can be NO GW survivors.

John D: Most Definitely Right

Free To Watch: Thanks for a little review of what the scientific method SHOULD reflect.

Bruce: I too remember “The Coming Ice Age”. It forced me to choose, with limited resources, between a HEMI powered Duster and a bunch of damn fur coats. I made the right choice.

Chip: You absolutely killed me. I knew that there was something wrong with that damn bear. Just wasn’t sure what. The bastard had such a forlorn look. That’s how I’m gonna look when there are no more pretty Latinas interested in my special counsel and camaraderie.

Lochness: Even Republicans need quality air and water. I have no desire to live in a waste dump regardless to who may have created it. We are never against clean air, water, and land, but that’s not the end-game that the GW cultists seek to impose upon us.

Real Scientist: Lots of links, but it is an issue of credibility now. Links don’t mean a whole lot if the credibility has to be questioned. And we do question it.

Son Of Liberty: The Liberal mind is just a total mystery. Notice, without regard to what the issue is, a Liberal will always try to divert the discourse to something else – Sarah Palin, Darth Vader, WMDs, TR and the Rough Riders. Liberals are still trapped in the Land of Nod. It, of course, is not their fault. As usual, they see, hear, smell, nothing. Nothing at all. Hell, their whole damn existence is based on nothing. Nothing at all.

“Big AWL” is not the monolithic body of Group-Think that misguided Liberals want to portray. Shell Oil has tried to dance with these fools. They are now beginning to question the false wisdom of that political game.

Great posts, gentlemen.

Danram: Thanx for the factual numbers and the Xcellent Socratic questioning. Totally wasted on Liberals, but then that's sort of a requirement necessary for a Liberal to, well, be a Liberal. There's no correction for that error-possessed lifestyle.

Flatearthers unite:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/12/05/climate.data.met.office/index.html

Posted by: fact's?, we don't need no facts! | December 7, 2009 11:12 AM

Flatearthers unite:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/12/05/climate.data.met.office/index.html

________________________________

Will it be the raw data or the data they played with?

Django, liberal scientists don't need no stinkin' facts. And any facts that they come across, they just manipulate the data, or find a way to make it "fit" by concentrating on a small part of the big picture.

Yes, Free To Watch, this has gone on a lot longer and a lot further than any rational honest discourse should have allowed. Is it a combination of main stream liberal media promotion + Environmental Extreme Weirdness + socialist control acts of collusion or a real inability to analyze an admittedly complex envelop of data that defines the Earth’s Biosphere.

I am an engineer + math degree guy, no more than maybe slightly better than the mean, and that can certainly be legitimately questioned. But THIS, so offends me. This is NOT in line with the highly structured training and procedures of operations that engineers, mathematicians, and scientists are normally weighted down with. There are STILL many holes in the Liberals’ GW argument that they would say is settled, but then when they add to that the manipulation of data, your CREDIBILITY is just destroyed. A Simian can guess and be right half the time. You, Mr. Scientist, have to do a heck of a lot better than that.