Tuesday, 31 July 2012

Fresh News on Anthony Watts' pre-publication paper.

Hitler's reaction to the Anthony Watts paper.....

NO WIN - NO FEE

From Larry Pickering's Face book Site -






Apart from having the sort of head you’d never get tired of kicking, AWU boss Paul Howes’ record of protecting workers’ interests is abysmal.
Police can’t act without a complaint and there are no complaints coming from Howes or the HSU East’s Williamson. It is no secret as to why.

When someone like the HSU East’s Kathy Jackson files a complaint, Bill Shorten shuts her down by placing the union in administration. Anyway, Craig Thomson is nothing but a small fish among schools of sharks in an ongoing feeding frenzy.

Howes’ union crony and co-Rudd assassin, Bill Shorten, does nothing either. (Except to plead it's an isolated case.) In fact, he goes to extreme lengths to obfuscate the blatant theft.

Left wing law firms have become union savvy and unions have become Left wing law firm savvy. Paul Howes, makes no effort to recover those stolen members’ funds. I wonder why.

The Gillard Government is a creation of corrupt unions, is stacked with ex-unionists (more than 50 of them) and protected by corrupt union bosses. The people who could bring down this corrupt Government (Craig Thomson, Doug McClelland and Ian Cambridge) have either been dumped or promoted to the union controlled FWA.

Oakeshott and Windsor will not walk the plank for the sake of this nation.

As an official of the ARU I quickly learnt the modus operandi of major unions. It wasn’t pretty then... it’s grotesquely ugly now.

The silence is deafening from the Left wing law firm, Slater & Gordon, as accusations continue to fly from credible sources.

It seems strange that a law firm would not immediately sue or at least take out an injunction against its accusers. Well, here you go boys, I’ll make it easy for you.

• You (Slater & Gordon) have been complicit in fraudulent activities involving AWU officials.
• You aided and abetted union officials in the theft of funds rightfully belonging to AWU members.
• You knew the accounts those stolen funds moved into and out of were fraudulent accounts set up by a certain Julia Eileen Gillard, your Partner.

How’s that? Enough for you yet?  Okay, here’s some more:

• You aided and abetted a Bruce Morton Wilson in the dispersal of those stolen funds.
• You represented your client (the AWU) in clear conflict of interest.
• You provided a loan to Bruce Wilson when you knew the loan assisted in the fraud.
• You have done nothing to recover or assist to recover funds misappropriated by your clients, Bruce Wilson and Ralph Blewitt.
• You refuse to release documentation detailing the above.

Is that enough boys, or should I go on? Come on, it's not that hard, surely. Sue me! You’re a law firm aren’t you? You can even give yourself mates’ rates.

There are more than 250,000 people who will see this article via blogs, 10,000 viral emails, Facebook, “The Pickering Post” and its Facebook. God knows how many they will share it with!

I notice you have bumped up your TV advertisements to convince people of your newfound “ethics”. Are you feeling the pinch?
Waste of money I’d say. Oh, unless it’s not yours.

What is it you say, “No Win, No Fee”? Well, you won’t win this one, so you’re home free. You can’t really lose can you?

Oh, yes you bloody can... and you know it!

You are a disgrace and menace to the industrial law you espouse, the people you represent and to the legal profession in general.

Come clean or come get me, you thieving, degenerate shysters!

Potential Cheap Method of Desalination.

Graphene is an atomic-scale honeycomb lattice
made of carbon atoms. Image: Wikipedia.
Graphene is an allotrope of carbon. Its structure is one-atom-thick planar sheets of sp2-bonded carbon atoms that are densely packed in a honeycomb crystal lattice.[1]  Source Wikipedia

The availability of fresh water is dwindling in many parts of the world, a problem that is expected to grow with populations. One promising source of potable water is the world's virtually limitless supply of seawater, but so far desalination technology has been too expensive for widespread use.

Now, MIT researchers have come up with a new approach using a different kind of filtration material: sheets of graphene, a one-atom-thick form of the element carbon, which they say can be far more efficient and possibly less expensive than existing desalination systems.

Read more at MIT News: http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2012/graphene-water-desalination-0702.html



Seems like a promising idea......but wait, graphene is an allotrope of the dreaded "pollutant" carbon.

Oh-oh! Carbon tax.

ASSESSING THE WEATHER STATIONS

NZCLIMATE TRUTH NEWSLETTER NO 298 

by Vincent Gray

JULY 30th 2012

Image: WUWT
ASSESSING THE WEATHER STATIONS




Anthony Watts, Evan Jones, Stephen McIntyre and John R Christy have published in draft form a new study on US weather stations at
http://wattsupwiththat.com/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/29/press-release-2/
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/watts-et-al_2012_discussion_paper_webrelease.pdf
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/watts-et-al-2012-figures-and-tables-final1.pdf

They apply a new methodology which makes allowances for every possible interfering factor such as proximity to heat sources or concrete,  asphalt, runways, tarmac and buildings, area weighted and distance weighted, and quality of equipment and maitenance. They apply these to thirty years of US temperature records from 1979 to 2008.

Using the new Leroy 2010 classification system on the older siting metadata used by Fall et al. (2011), Menne et al. (2010), and Muller et al. (2012), yields dramatically different results.

Using Leroy 2010 methods, the Watts et al 2012 paper, which studies several aspects of USHCN siting issues and data adjustments, concludes that:
These factors, combined with station siting issues, have led to a spurious doubling of U.S. mean temperature trends in the 30 year data period covered by the study from 1979 – 2008.
Other findings include, but are not limited to:

  • Statistically significant differences between compliant and non-compliant stations exist, as well as urban and rural stations.
  • Poorly sited station trends are adjusted sharply upward, and well sited stations are adjusted upward to match the already-adjusted poor stations.
  • Well sited rural stations show a warming nearly three times greater after NOAA adjustment is applied.
  • Urban sites warm more rapidly than semi-urban sites, which in turn warm more rapidly than rural sites.
  • The raw data Tmean trend for well sited stations is 0.15°C per decade lower than adjusted Tmean trend for poorly sited stations.
  • Airport USHCN stations show a significant differences in trends than other USHCN stations, and due to equipment issues and other problems, may not be representative stations for monitoring climate.

Also see a lecture that was presented at the recent Heartland Sceptyics conference

http://climateconferences.heartland.org/andrei-illarionov-iccc4/

Professor Illaniaov shows that the current method  of assessing Russian weather stations exaggerates the few (only 4) stations with records before 1859 and impose the urban heating from these stations on the whole set, however large. Since Russia has 11.5% of the total land area of the world.it has a large influence on global figures, which are themselves affected by a similar error..


Cheers
Vincent Gray
Wellington 6035

"It's not what you don't know that fools you. It's what you do know that ain't so." ~Josh Billings

Sustainability is impossible. There are only two directions; forward and backward.

The BEST of advice: Don't live in the PAST


The Sydney Morning Herald has an article today ( reprinted from the New York Times):(LINK)
Cartoons by Josh

How I saw past the hot air on climate (LINK)

Richard Muller writes of his Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature
Study (BEST):
 Three years ago, I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming.   
.............
Our results show that the average temperature of the Earth's land has risen by about 1.5 degrees Celsius over the past 250 years, including an increase of five-sixths of one degree over the past 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this rise is from humans' emission of greenhouse gases.

The trouble is in his first three words ~ Three years ago - Richard is living in the past. Even in the past, co-author of his paper,  Judith  Curry, an American climatologist and chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, accused him "of  trying to mislead the public by hiding the fact that BEST’s research shows global warming has stopped."(LINK)
However, a new pre-print paper has changed all that (LINK)
 Roger Pielke Snr writes: (LINK)
This paper is a game changer, in my view, with respect to the use of the land surface temperature anomalies as part of the diagnosis of global warming.
In direct contradiction to Richard Muller’s BEST study,  the new Watts et al 2012 paper has very effectively shown that a substantive warm bias exists even in the mean temperature trends.  This type of bias certainly exists throughout the Global Historical Climate Network, as well as what Anthony has documented for the US Historical Climate Reference Network.
Roger adds:
(Muller's) latest BEST claims are, in my view, an embarrassment. 
Let's not forget that, although his paper has been floating around in the scientific arena,
Muller's study has not yet been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, but he says he plans to do so at some point. 

Jo Nova writes (of the Watts paper): (LINK)

Assuming that no major problems are found, the pieces of the jigsaw fit and pass the common sense test. Yes, hot air rises off concrete.
  1. There goes half the warming trend. The most accurate thermometers in the right places are not recording high trends. High estimates come from combining good records with poor ones then adjusting that up.
  2. They show Mueller and BEST’s latest exaggerated claims of 1.5C are meaningless.
  3. They show that only class 1 and 2 stations (which are placed well, not next to concrete, car-parks, or air-conditioners) give reliable data and the warming trend from these stations is much lower than the warming trend from Class 3, 4 or 5 stations. It’s what we always knew — thermometers near artificial heat sources are measuring artificial warming, but it’s not the global kind.
  4. Mueller, BEST, GISS, Hadley and all the others should have removed the data from poor stations entirely. No amount of statistical chicanery can correct the artificial warming effect no matter how you adjust, blend, or homogenize the data.
  5. Worse, the adjusted data shows an even warmer trend than the warmest and worst stations. That casts a very dark shadow indeed. How honest or impartial are the scientists who adjust data from stations with thermometers near air-conditioners and create more warming? Bad stations have been adjusted up, instead of down, and then the good stations were adjusted up to match the now-really-awful-bad ones. The stench of failure and a lack of dedication to the truth in on show…
You don’t need a PhD to know that thermometers placed in car parks are not measuring global warming.