Thursday, 29 December 2011

The ABC's Alarmism strikes again - incorrect and misleading.

Purves: Tell him he's dreaming, son!
On the 7:30 report, the ABC report on Robert Purves is tagged:
In his first television profile, multimillionaire mover and shaker Robert Purves steps into the spotlight to support the science on climate change.
The video includes comments from GAIA worshipper and Part Time Climate Commissioner Tim Flannery. Tim is a hypocrite.  The Australian of 5th March 2010 quoted Tim Flannery's estimate of a 60 metre sea-level rise and yet he lives just above sea-level on the Hawkesbury.

Robert Purves is a multimillionaire who is throwing his money into the Climate Alarmist Black Hole. The Monthly describes him as one of  Australia’s Patrons of Climate Change Activism.

As well as being a member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists and supporting the core global team running Earth Hour, he has given millions of dollars to the WWF,  Purves has also funded Sustainable Business Australia, The Climate Group, the Climate Action Network Australia, the Copenhagen Climate Council and Clean Up Australia. He funds the Total Environment Centre and its Green Capital program and the list goes on. His connection with Professor Tim - Few people realise that Purves substantially funded the writing and extensive promotion of Tim Flannery’s book The Weather Makers.

Readers of this blog know that The Weather Makers has been exposed as a sloppy unscientific work by Dr Wes Allen's The Weather Makers Re-examined.

The Weather Makers is shown to contain
  • 23 misinterpretations, 
  • 28 contradictory statements,
  • 31 untraceable or suspect sources, 
  • 45 failures to reflect uncertainty, 
  • 66 over-simplifications or factual errors, 
  • 78 exaggerations and over a hundred unsupported dogmatic statements, many of them quite outlandish.
Is Greenland in danger as Purves and the ABC alarmists say? If Greenland was truly melting, wouldn't Professor Tim have changed his residence?

Map of Greenland from the 13th edition of The Times Atlas of the World (left) and a mosaic of MODIS satellite images of the same area acquired on the 14th and 15th August 2011 (UK Telegraph Image)
Earlier  this year, the publishers of The Times Comprehensive Atlas of the World tried to suggest incorrectly that Greenland lost 15% of its permanent ice cover. They had to scramble to correct this when a group of concerned scientists refuted their claim. (UK Telegraph)
We are extremely puzzled by this statement and the claim that ‘For the first time, the new edition of The Times Comprehensive Atlas of the World has had to erase 15 per cent of Greenland’s once permanent ice cover – turning an area the size of the United Kingdom and Ireland ‘green’ and ice-free’. We write to point out that a 15 per cent decrease in permanent ice cover since the publication of the previous atlas 12 years is both incorrect and misleading.
Stephen Wilde on Climate Realists writes:
In order to ascertain whether there is a global warming or cooling trend it is necessary to wait several years and then compare the volume and intensity of the cold polar air masses as a whole between the dates chosen. In this case I have chosen the years 2007 and 2011.
It is obvious to me that the isotherms have moved equatorward both over land and oceans and that the intensity of cold where it is most readily generated has increased, especially over the Greenland icecap and Northern Russia. 

Surely "our" alarmist ABC is also both incorrect and misleading.

h/t Bev and Rae

1 comment:

  1. Summarising the three key issues that should trouble Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) proponents the most they would be these:

    (a) Predictions of the most warming supposedly due to carbon dioxide are in the Arctic. Yet historical records at Jan Mayen Island (latitude 70.9N - within the Arctic circle) show absolutely no warming since 1930 and in fact show warmer temperatures in the 1930's.

    (b) Prof. Claes Johnson has published a detailed mathematical proof that back radiation (having frequencies less than or equal to the original upward radiation from the surface) cannot "overcome" that radiation and actually get absorbed and converted to extra thermal energy. Only radiation with frequencies above the cut off (as determined by Wien's Displacement Law) can be converted to thermal energy, as is the case with UV and visible spectrum radiation from the Sun.

    (c) Curved trend lines shown in plots by both Trenberth and Spencer clearly indicate that a maximum has been passed and a decline commenced.

    There are links and further details on this at my site


All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!