Now is it NASA-GISSgate?

http://www.judicialwatch.org/foiablog/2010/apr/nasa-giss-documents-posted-online

Judicial Watch (Promoting Integrity, Transparency and Accountability in Government, Politics and the Law) have obtained Records of NASA-GISS’s internal correspondence. Hot on the heals of ClimateGate, HimalayaGate etc do we have another "gate" here? (22/4)

"Records of NASA’s internal correspondence surrounding this controversy were obtained in a partial response to a FOIA request filed in December 2009 by Judicial Watch. This month, NASA officials informed Judicial Watch that the remaining documents responsive to our request have been posted online at the NASA GISS website."

NASA documents (5 PDFs) - http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/business/foia/GISS.html

Judicial Watch News Release: http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/business/foia/GISS.html

Interesting! For example, to avoid the UHI effect, the Chinese Meteorological Administration keep moving measuring implements:

Jones:

My biggest worry is China. CMA don’t measure at airports, and they keep moving suburban locations a few more miles out as the cities expand. I was there a month ago to give some talks. I’ve sent them all the CRU data for China, in the hope that they will reciprocate at some point and send me their adjusted data. (for site moves, but not urban influences). They are doing some reasonable work, but not seeing the big picture…

The big picture being that the Alarmists want to Alarm.

Climate Consequences with Anthony Watts

Renowned meteorologist Anthony Watts is including Emerald in his Australian Tour


This is your opportunity to hear all sides and make up your own mind about the
Climate Change Debate

Date: June 19 2010 Time: 7:30pm
Location: Emerald Town Hall
Entry: $20 (Coffee and snacks provided. Bar operating)

Other Speakers:

David Archibald – an Australian–based scientist operating in the fields of climate science, cancer research and the author of Solar Cycle 24 – Why the world will continue cooling and why carbon dioxide won’t make a detectable difference.

David Stockwell PhD. Former US scientist living in Emerald & author of the book Niche Modelling - the ‘known known’ consequences of climate change, especially for the Central Highlands mining, pastoral and agricultural industries.

For enquiries call 0417043732 or davids99us@gmail.com

A PUBLIC FORUM On the issue of "Climate Change/Global Warming

A PUBLIC FORUM

On the issue of

"Climate Change/Global Warming

Wednesday 28th April

at "The All Seasons" McIvor Highway, Bendigo

7pm for a 7:30 start

Featuring Professor Bob Carter.


“Expert scientific knowledge, informative, easily
understood & a very entertaining presentation”

Entry: $5

"Take A Look on the Other Side"

ENQUIRIES RE FORUM

climateforum@impulse.net.au

Green's Witch or GreenSwitch?

The Christian Science Monitor (20/4) has reported a fraud in the Carbon Offset Market.

A company called GreenSwitch was selling "green power" certificates. Very noble of them, NOT! They didn't buy the renewable energy in the first place.

"In January, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) ordered GreenSwitch's parent company, Global Green Plan, to buy 4,000 certificates at a cost of about US$128,000. Then the agency took offsetter Prime Carbon to court over false claims it was affiliated with the National Stock Exchange and approved by the Australian government."

The ACCC Chairman, Graeme Samuels has reported
• SAAB had a dubious tree planting claim;
• Avoid a Japan-based offset promoter.

Point Carbon http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.1438065 pointed out the same day that "Carbon credits stolen during a phishing scam were transferred to accounts in Denmark and the UK."

Meanwhile, the Huffington Post (20/4) asks: "Can Carbon Offsets Save the Planet? Don't Bet on It"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-yemma/can-carbon-offsets-save-t_b_544547.html

The article is written by the Editor of the Christian Science Monitor.

Which leads me to the question - Are Christian Scientists the only Scientists we can trust these days?

IPCC report is inaccurate and dishonest

A third of the IPCC report is inaccurate and dishonest

A Press release by the President of Australia's Climate Sceptics Party



Sir / Madam,

In 1922 there was a concern that the globe was overheating
In 1970 the scare was that an ice age was looming.
Now we have climate scares come and go regularly. Mixed with other scares such as running out of fossil fuels and mass species extinctions.

So, to know if these scares are real or not, we need truthful hard nosed science that can be relied upon.

So let's examine the 2007 Climate Change report by the IPCC.
Forty researchers from 12 countries have just checked out every one of the 18,531 scientific sources cited. They found that almost a third of them – 5,587 – were not peer-reviewed at all, but came from newspaper articles, student theses, even propaganda leaflets and press releases put out by green activists and lobby groups.
On top of this the IPCC predictions of Global Temperatures rising from 1998 has not eventuated for over a decade.
And the predicted sea level rise has stopped over the last 4 years.

Therefore the "accepted" science of the IPCC is not science at all. It's a politicised, compromised and deceitful compilation of misinformation and scares. In reality the word science should not be associated with it. Science fiction would be more appropriate.
Unfortunately our Prime Minister has swallowed this report unquestioningly AND he will still use it as the reason to bring in an ETS if he wins the next election.


Leon Ashby
President The Climate Sceptics

http://www.climatesceptics.com.au/

Carbon emissions

As AFP (Link in title) points out today, the Iceland Volcano Eyjafjallajökull is emitting up to 300,000 tons of carbon dioxide per day, which, if extrapolated to an annual amount (15 million tons) would be similar to the emissions of Austria, Belarus,Denmark or Portugal.

However, as the UK Times on line points out, The grounding of 63,000 flights over the past four days has saved 1.3 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, more than the annual emissions of many developing countries.

So, Eyjafjallajökull emits 300,000 over 4 days ie 1.2 million tonnes while grounded planes saved 1.3 million tonne - hey, a reduction. Now, if we could get a few more volcanic eruptions happening around the globe, we could get the Gores and Greens of our back.

For a more serious look at Volcanoes, see Andy's Rant :
http://www.andylsemple.com/index.php?page_id=blog&blog_id=29

WickedPedia Bullies

Anthony Watts via Lawrence Solomon exposed the fact that William Connolley from RealClimate altered all references to AGW to the alarmist spin. The Wikipedia entry for the Climate Sceptics Party, for instance, kept saying that we were climate change sceptics and I kept changing the article to say that we KNEW climate changes - we were AGW sceptics. About an hour after I had changed it, some-one, probably Connolley, changed it back to "Climate Change Sceptics." Now the site has disappeared altogether:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_Sceptics_Party

Supposedly, all of Connolley's fictional re-writes have disappeared. What then can we make of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial



Looking at it in detail, it is easy to make mockery of this entry.

Denial is a shameful inflammatory word subtley trying to link AGW questioners to Holocaust Deniers. It has been used by Welcher Bussell.

Their sentence: "Climate change denial is a term used to describe attempts to downplay the extent of global warming, its significance, or its connection to human behavior, especially for financial or other sectional interests." As Professor Carter points out: "First, there has been no recent global warming in the common meaning of the term, for world average temperature has cooled for the last ten years. Furthermore, since 1940 the earth has warmed for nineteen years and cooled for forty-nine, the overall result being that global average temperature is now about the same as it was in 1940."

BACK to Wikipedia: "There is nearly unanimous agreement among climate scientists that global warming is occurring and is mainly attributable to human causes."

Notice the subtle move away from Scientific Consensus! But, we all know that there is nothing like "nearly unanimous agreement." Petition Project, Senator Inhofe's list etc etc.

When we have the Vostok Ice Core samples showing that atmospheric CO2 rises after global temperature rises and Doctor Miskolczi's papers showing that CO2 is innocent, denier Al Gore saying he didn't know who (his partners' firm) Goldman Sachs were, perhaps Wikipedia should be editing this article.

The Reality of Anthropogenic Global Warming

An Alarmist (Mr Grant Bussell) on the Agmates site posted the following:

http://agmates.ning.com/forum/topics/an-easy-grand-for-the?commentId=3535428%3AComment%3A87635

"Fact is I've tried to be restrained but anyone who denies the reality of (anthropogenic) global warming and the need to respond to it is crazy, ignorant, or being paid to do so. I have nothing but contempt for them because they are compromising the future of our descendants. These people have successful stopped effective policy responses in the USA and Australia and other countries and we remain unprepared for climate catastrophes which are now almost certainly inevitable."

I have to say that I am not crazy nor ignorant and, as yet (but still will consider offers..) have not been paid for my anti-AGW position.

Forgetting the obvious ad hominen attack on us climate realists, us sceptics, on the unproven theory of man-made global warming, he says that because of us Climate Realists, our countries "remain unprepared for climate catastrophes which are now almost certainly inevitable."

Although he has admitted that he doesn't read contributions contrary to his Alarmist Beliefs and seems to have reneged on a $1000 bet, (Is that Grand Larceny?) perhaps he hasn't read Professor Robert M Carter's Quadrant article previous posted here.

http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2009/4/a-new-policy-direction-for-climate-change


In Professor Carter's article he stresses the need to be prepared for climate catastrophes.

Natural climate changes of all types are going to continue to affect our planet, and from time to time these changes will wreak human and environmental damage. Future changes will include cooling trends, warming trends and sudden step-events. Extreme weather events and their consequences, and prolonged inconveniences such as droughts, are natural disasters of similar character to earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanic eruptions, in that in our present state of knowledge they can neither be predicted far ahead nor prevented once they are under way.

It is more than possible to be a Climate Realist, a believer in other than man-made global warming, and still be aware that extreme weather events can happen.

In fact, it helps to realise that extra life-giving CO2 can be added to the atmosphere, helping to create food for the ever increasing world population knowing that the increase does not cause warming.

It is also good to know, as Professor Carter points out in his article:

"Get this. First, there has been no recent global warming in the common meaning of the term, for world average temperature has cooled for the last ten years. Furthermore, since 1940 the earth has warmed for nineteen years and cooled for forty-nine, the overall result being that global average temperature is now about the same as it was in 1940."