Wednesday, 7 May 2014

John Holdren: Disrupting the Warming Hiatus.

What happens when the benevolent rise in global temperature comes to a halt for almost 18 years?


Well, for the first few years, the Global Warming Nazis decide that using the term "climate change" suits their propaganda cause better than "man made global warming."


But what happens when the planet starts to cool?


Well, according to White House Advisor John Holdren,  it should be called "Climate Disruption." (link)

Holdren's remarks were made in preparation for this week's release of the White House's National Climate Assessment.

Holdren has made the suggestion before in 2010 (link)
The White House wants the public to start using the term "global climate disruption" in place of "global warming" -- fearing the latter term oversimplifies the problem and makes it sound less dangerous than it really is.  
White House science adviser John Holdren urged people to start using the phrase during a speech last week in Oslo, echoing a plea he made three years earlier. Holdren said global warming is a "dangerous misnomer" for a problem far more complicated than a rise in temperature. 
Let's see....Holdren seems to make the call every three years.    Hmmmm.....

Anyone taking bets on Holdren remaking the call in 2017?

More Nails in the CAGW Coffin

Although the Great Global Warming Swindle has been mortally wounded, the Global Warming Nazis continue to push the falsified man-made global warming hoax.

The latest litany of lies listed in the White House’s release of its National Climate Assessment has created more nails for the Catastrophic Global Warming hoax's coffin.

There are various responses showing the errors in the White House report; for example Chip Knappenberger and Pat Michaels'

What the National Climate Assessment Doesn’t Tell You

The bias in the National Climate Assessment (NCA) towards pessimism (which we have previously detailed here) has implications throughout the federal regulatory process because the NCA is cited (either directly or indirectly) as a primary source for the science of climate change for justifying federal regulation aimed towards mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. Since the NCA gets it wrong, so does everyone else. 
A good example of this can be found in how climate change is effecting  the human response during heat waves.  The NCA foresees an increasing frequency and magnitude of heat waves leading to growing numbers of heat-related deaths. The leading science suggests just the opposite.
Case and point. Last week, we had an article published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Nature Climate Change that showed how the impacts of extreme heat are often overplayed while the impacts of adaptation to the heat are underplayed.  And a new paper has just been published in the journalEnvironmental Health Perspectives that finds that the risk of dying from heat waves in the U.S. has been on the decline for the past several decades. 
By now, this should be rather unsurprising as it has been demonstrated over and over again. Not only in the U.S. but in Europe (and yes, Stockholm) and other major global cities as well.  

Read more at Cato - LINK.

Some responses from the Heartland Institute: (LINK)

James M Taylor:
“This laughably misleading report is the predictable result when hard-core environmental activists are chosen to write up a climate assessment for, and subject to the approval and revisions of, the Obama administration. It is like the punch line to a bad joke: ‘How many environmental activists does it take to put together an alarmist global warming report?’

Alan Caruba:
“What a different nation America could be were it not for Obama’s deliberate attack on the coal industry and other fossil fuels sources. In the name of reducing emissions climatologists believe play a minor role in climate change, Obama deliberately ignores the increasing use of coal in nations like China, Japan, and India. Nothing the U.S. does will impact the climate when the use of fossil fuels by other nations is factored in.”
Marc Morano:
"This report is contrary to peer-reviewed studies and observations. By every measure, so called extreme weather is showing no trend or declining trends on 50-100 year timescales. Droughts, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes are not increasing due to man-made global warming.  
"Why does the report now call 'global warming' a new name, so-called 'climate disruption'? Simple answer: Due to earth's failure to warm -- no global warming for nearly 18 years - another name was necessary to attempt to gin up fear. Now every storm is offerred up as some sort of 'proof' of global warming. 
Further  Responses:

Dr Judith Curry:

While there is some useful analysis in the report, it is hidden behind a false premise that any change in the 20th century has been caused by AGW.  Worse yet is the spin being put on this by the Obama administration.  

The failure to imagine future extreme events and climate scenarios, other than those that are driven by CO2 emissions and simulated by deficient climate models, has the potential to increase our vulnerability to future climate surprises (see my recent presentation on this Generating possibility distributions of scenarios for regional climate change).  As an example, the Report highlights the shrinking of winter ice in the Great Lakes:  presently, in May, Lake Superior is 30% cover by ice, which is apparently unprecedented in the historical record.
Dr Roger Cohen:
The central government's claims of more extreme weather are pure fabrication. They expect us to believe that every storm, drought, flood, or whatever is due to driving your SUV. Like an astrology forecast, their so called "science" is made to fit everything that happens after the fact, but they predict nothing that actually happens. Indeed the world has not warmed at all for more than 15 years, despite their predictions that it would. For those who want to see the real facts, consult for example the Congressional testimony of Dr. John Christy, Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science, Alabama’s State Climatologist and Director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. http://docs.house.gov/meetings/SY/SY18/20131211/101589/HHRG-113-SY18-Wstate-ChristyJ-20131211.pdf 
If anything there has been a decline in strong tornadoes, hurricane landfalls, droughts, wildfires, and record highs. Yet the propaganda grinds on as the central government continues to reach for yet more power over all of us.
Roger Pielke Jr:
How many more nails do we need to finally seal that coffin?



The National Climate Assessment.

Re-Assessment

by Anthony Cox

President Obama has released the latest National Climate Assessment [NCA]. The NCA is full of untruths like the consensus being 97% of all climate scientists endorsing AGW; the 97%consensus is a complete fabrication.

The NCA’s greatest untruth however is its reliance on the temperature record. Anthony Watts looks at the temperature record and shows how the adjustments made to the temperature record which the NCA relies on exceed the ostensible temperature increase. In short the past temperatures are decreased and the current temperatures are increased. This creates an instant trend:
Source Data: NOAA USHCN V2.5 data http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/ushcn/

The graph shows how the past temperatures are adjusted down while the modern temperatures are adjusted up. The same pattern of temperature adjustments occur in Australia as Jo Nova and her team showed.

Temperature adjustments should be even across the range and not contribute to or produce a trend. Both the BOM and the NCA fail this test.

The effect of this fabrication is insidious. It provides justification for a huge transfer of resources to pro-AGW projects including the failed renewable energy sources. More poignantly it corrupts the values and standards of a wide range of social institutions. The CSIRO and BOM have their research tainted by conformity to AGW ideology. In education at all levels the fear mongering and untruths of such bodies as the NCA permeates what children are taught. The use of children as victims and the target of this propaganda has been well documented. The imagery of this propaganda is vile:


In the 6 May 2014 edition of the Newcastle Morning Herald, the Education Supplement featured this article written with great conviction by some pupils:

Our Planet is heading for more Damage.
Global warming is affecting Australia with humans pumping more carbon dioxide in to the atmosphere. 
Many things are contributing to this, even flatulating cows because of the methane they release. 
Global warming is affecting the ocean’s surface temperatures and it has been observed that there has been an increase in warmer days and nights. 
There is strong scientific evidence that indicates that global warming increases certain types of extreme weather events such as heatwaves, coastal flooding and more severe droughts. The rise of sea levels affects coastal property, people and ecosystems. 
The Hunter region, and in particular Lake Macquarie, has experienced the effects of rising sea levels due to global warming. Lake Macquarie Council has amended its flood resilient housing guidelines to approve the building of floating houses in the area. Other options include raising floor levels, moving houses to higher land, relocatable homes and converting lower floors to car parking and storage.If ice caps continue to melt, rising water levels will be a major problem for coastal towns across the world.



This is terrible. None of this is true but obviously these poor kids are being fed drivel by alarmist educators.

Cows are carbon neutral. Peer reviewed and expert analysis shows that cows are part of a closed loop where plants sequester CO2, are eaten by cows which then release the same amount of CO2 back into the atmosphere; net increase zero.

The ocean’s surface temperatures are declining:


Since 2003 when the ARGO sea temperature measuring devices were introduced sea surface temperatures have fallen drastically. So if global warming is affecting the sea it is a cooling affect!

As for warmer days and nights, this is also untrue. The difference between the minimum temperature or night temperature and the maximum or day temperature is called the Diurnal temperature range [DTR]. The IPCC and global warming theory says the DTR will decrease because night temperatures will warm faster than day temperatures. But this is untrue:


The failure of the DTR to decrease is a major contradiction of global warming but these poor kids are obviously being fed information which is simply wrong.

The notion that extreme weather will increase because of global warming is completely wrong with even alarmist scientists like Professor Mueller saying that global warming will DECREASE extreme weather events. Even prestigious scientific journals which promote global warming like Nature say global warming will not produce extreme weather and the IPCC has conceded that many types of extreme weather have no connection with global warming.

Lake Macquarie has NOT experienced any sea level rise. All one has to do is check the sea level rise history for Lake Macquarie and Newcastle:


The fact that Lake Macquarie council has brought in new, very expensive codes for houses in its area is an example of how false information can be used by authorities to implement ideologically driven policy at great and unnecessary cost to their constituents.

Finally, the caps are not melting; the Arctic sea ice is starting to grow again after losing sea ice through the naturally warm period from 1979. The Antarctic is at record levels both for sea ice and land ice:



The NCA is just another part of the dubious information which is propping up the global warming scare. It is a great shame that as well as the vast amount of money being wasted on this failed theory that school children are being given a false view and education and no doubt frightened in the process.


Open Letter to the National Australian Health Board re Wind Energy.

Open Letter 

Dear Professors Anderson, McCallum and Armstrong,

This letter is the formal response of the Waubra Foundation to the NHMRC commissioned Systematic Review and the NHMRC’s Draft Information Statement concerning wind turbines and adverse health effects. I note that the public has not been invited to comment on the Systematic Review, however in light of the serious issues which have arisen about that document and because the draft information statement relies heavily upon the Systematic Review, this has been sent directly to you, and is a public document.

As you know, the Chairman of the Waubra Foundation, Mr Peter Mitchell, is an observer on the NHMRC Literature Review Panel, and is bound by a strict confidentiality agreement. Accordingly no discussion with Mr Mitchell about the Panel’s deliberations has taken place with any Board member, including any discussion about either the Systematic Review or the Draft Information Statement. Mr Mitchell has had no involvement in the preparation of this document, and the contents of it have not been discussed with him. The comments relate solely to the wind turbine noise evidence.

We are pleased the NHMRC has acknowledged the lack of concurrent full spectrum acoustic measurements together with objective physiological monitoring of sleep (EEG), blood pressure, heart rate and biochemical markers of physiological stress such as cortisol. We hope that identification of this important gap in knowledge (which we identified to the first Federal Senate Inquiry three years ago) is immediately addressed with thorough independent multidisciplinary research, conducted by researchers with no conflict of interest, and that the sole motivation of the research is the prevention of harm to human health from environmental noise.

We would like to see such multidisciplinary research extended to include other environmental noise sources.

Yours sincerely

Sarah Laurie, CEO Waubra Foundation
Bachelor Medicine, Bachelor Surgery, Flinders University, 1995

For Waubra's Supporting Documentation Go to:

http://docs.wind-watch.org/WF-Response-to-NHRMC-Systematic-Review-Apr-11-2014.pdf

Some extracts:
There is a large body of relevant research relating to the adverse health consequences of chronic sleep disturbance and chronic stress, regardless of the cause. One important recent meta analysis by Capuccio et al was provided to the Systematic Literature Team but was excluded (p 266) because “the population was unsuitable”.

Whilst the population in this meta analysis was not exclusively wind turbine sleep deprived residents, clearly the findings that cardiovascular disease was associated with insufficient sleep is of great relevance to a population group whose main reported adverse health effect, acknowledged in the limited research literature, is sleep disturbance. The cause of the sleep disturbance is immaterial to the downstream health effects, but the consequences are clear. The Capuccio meta analysis is available here:
http://waubrafoundation.org.au/resources/sleep-duration-predicts-cardiovascular-outcomes/ 
 - - - - - - - - - - 
“Annoyance” – what is it? 
 
A subset of these people also report symptoms which UK Acoustician Professor Geoffrey Leventhall has identified as known to him for years to be “symptoms of annoyance from environmental noise”, but which others especially those trained in the diagnosis of human diseases are increasingly calling “wind turbine syndrome” (WTS) or “infrasound and low frequency noise syndrome” (ILFNS). Academic socioacoustic
researchers use the term “annoyance” to mean something else again.

Use of the term “highly annoyed” to refer to someone who is acutely suicidal, who medical practitioners would refer to as a “psychiatric emergency” is but one example of the misunderstanding caused between the different professional groups by the use of this word. Medical practitioners do not generally understand what others such as researchers and acousticians mean when they use the word “annoyance” as it is not a clinical diagnostic descriptor, and usage hides the range and severity of the specific adverse health impacts.

The sound frequencies below 200 Hz which directly cause these “annoyance” symptoms from wind turbine sound emissions were identified nearly 30 years ago by Dr Neil Kelley and a large team from 15 Research institutions including two branches of NASA, and funded by the US Government Department of Energy.