30 Years of Global Cooling Are Coming, Retarded pseudo-Journalists Say [Archive]

View Full Version : 30 Years of Global Cooling Are Coming, Retarded pseudo-Journalists Say

Fuct Jup

01-11-2010, 01:50 PM

From Miami to Maine, Savannah to Seattle, America is caught in an icy grip that one of the U.N.'s top global warming proponents says could mark the beginning of a mini ice age.

Oranges are freezing and millions of tropical fish are dying in Florida, and it could be just the beginning of a decades-long deep freeze, says Professor Mojib Latif, one of the world's leading climate modelers.

Latif thinks the cold snap Americans have been suffering through is only the beginning. He says we're in for 30 years of cooler temperatures -- a mini ice age, he calls it, basing his theory on an analysis of natural cycles in water temperatures in the world's oceans.

Latif, a professor at the Leibniz Institute at Germany's Kiel University and an author of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, believes the lengthy cold weather is merely a pause -- a 30-years-long blip -- in the larger cycle of global warming, which postulates that temperatures will rise rapidly over the coming years.

At a U.N. conference in September, Latif said that changes in ocean currents known as the North Atlantic Oscillation could dominate over manmade global warming for the next few decades. Latif said the fluctuations in these currents could also be responsible for much of the rise in global temperatures seen over the past 30 years.

Latif is a key member of the UN's climate research arm, which has long promoted the concept of global warming. He told the Daily Mail that "a significant share of the warming we saw from 1980 to 2000 and at earlier periods in the 20th Century was due to these cycles -- perhaps as much as 50 percent."

According to the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado, the warming of the Earth since 1900 is due to natural oceanic cycles, and not man-made greenhouse gases. The agency also reports that Arctic summer sea ice has increased by 409,000 square miles, or 26 per cent, since 2007.

Many parts of the world have been suffering through record-setting snowfalls and arctic temperatures. The Midwest saw wind chills as low as 49 degrees below zero last week, while Europe saw snows so heavy that Eurostar train service and air travel were canceled across much of the continent. In Asia, Beijing was hit by its heaviest snowfall in 60 years.

FOXNews.com - 30 Years of Global Cooling Are Coming, Leading Scientist Says (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/01/11/years-global-cooling-coming-say-leading-scientists/)

DAVID ROSE: The mini ice age starts here | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1242011/DAVID-ROSE-The-mini-ice-age-starts-here.html)

Nitro Express

01-11-2010, 02:21 PM

So we are back to where we were in the 1970's. Why do we give these people the time of day. They are manic. Scientists are wrong more than they are right. If you have seven scientists you have seven opinions. Now watch the fear mongers try and profit off of global cooling. Looks like we traded Heat Miser for Snow Miser.

Nitro Express

01-11-2010, 02:26 PM

We were snowed in the hotel in Detroit for five days due to the blizzard of 78. If that happened now people would blow it out like it was the end of the world. You would hear the talking heads yaking constantly about it bringing in every pin head they can find to overanalyze it.

Fuct Jup

01-11-2010, 04:53 PM

Seshmeister

01-11-2010, 05:20 PM

So we are back to where we were in the 1970's. Why do we give these people the time of day. They are manic. Scientists are wrong more than they are right.

If that was true it seems pretty unlikely you would be able to type crap into a screen for nothing and it could be instantly read all around the world.

I don't know why they give you or Fox Non News the time of day.

The guy has repeatedly explained his position and it has been deliberately or stupidly misreported and misunderstood again and again.

Leading climate scientist challenges Mail on Sunday's use of his research | Environment | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/11/climate-change-global-warming-mojib-latif)

Mojib Latif, a climate expert at the Leibniz Institute at Kiel University in Germany, said he "cannot understand" reports that used his research to question the scientific consensus on climate change.

He told the Guardian: "It comes as a surprise to me that people would try to use my statements to try to dispute the nature of global warming. I believe in manmade global warming. I have said that if my name was not Mojib Latif it would be global warming."

He added: "There is no doubt within the scientific community that we are affecting the climate, that the climate is changing and responding to our emissions of greenhouse gases."

It gets tiresome reading the same nonsense month after month.

His arguments and findings are outlined at the linked site but what's the point you won't accept it anyway. You would rather believe the Fox News Big Business distortion of what the guy is saying.

Nickdfresh

01-11-2010, 05:46 PM

Blackflag

01-11-2010, 06:20 PM

Scientists are wrong more than they are right.

The whole problem is - these hacks aren't "scientists" at all, on either side of the discussion.

Nitro Express

01-12-2010, 03:16 AM

The whole problem is - these hacks aren't "scientists" at all, on either side of the discussion.

The global warming thing was put together in the UN decades ago. This whole cap and trade thing with the selling of carbon credits is bunk. What's causing the warming is our current location relative to the galactic equator and the sun. All the planets in the solar system have warmed up. The Russians have done a lot of research on this. The guy behind the global warming push in the UN ran off to Bejing because he got caught being involved in the food for oil scandal.

Fuct Jup

01-12-2010, 11:38 AM

Thread title changed, because I'm sick of these completely disingenuous articles being routinely posted --even though the posters know they're repeating the same old stale bullshit that has been disproved or discredited dozens of times...

Yea - Because RECORD cold weather is has been discredited.... :umm:

Record chill eases over South
National Weather Forecast - weather.com (http://www.weather.com/newscenter/nationalforecast/index.html)

Year off to coldest start since 1940
Year off to coldest start since 1940 - al.com (http://www.al.com/news/huntsvilletimes/local.ssf?/base/news/1263032175182970.xml&coll=1)

Cold snap death toll rises across Europe
Cold snap death toll rises across Europe - The Irish Times - Fri, Jan 08, 2010 (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2010/0108/1224261897093.html)

Cold weather freezes thousands of fish in OS Harbor
Cold weather freezes thousands of fish in OS Harbor - WLOX-TV and WLOX.com - Building South Mississippi Together | (http://www.wlox.com/Global/story.asp?S=11794738)

Weather-related death toll rises to 22 as Britain braces for coldest night yet
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/weather/article6979830.ece

Ice delays morning flights at Tampa
Ice delays morning flights at TIA - Bay News 9 (http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2010/1/7/567053.html?title=New+problem+delaying+TIA+flights +-+ice)

Wind chill may drop below zero as coldest weather in 12 years hits North Texas
Bitter Cold Is Just Beginning | NBC Dallas-Fort Worth (http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local-beat/Coldest-Weather-in-12-Years-Descends-on-North-Texas-80828417.html)

Midwest bracing for heavy snow, wind chills of -50
Midwest bracing for heavy snow, wind chills of -50 - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100107/ap_on_re_us/us_winter_weather)

Cold grips much of US, Fla. races to save crops
WSVN-TV - Cold grips much of US, Fla. races to save crops (http://www.wsvn.com/news/articles/local/MI140329/)

This Winter May Be Worst Since 1985
AccuWeather.com - Weather Blogs - Weather News (http://www.accuweather.com/news-top-headline.asp?partner=accuweather&traveler=0&date=2010-01-06_08:49)

Florida: Rare Snow, Sleet...
AccuWeather.com - Weather Blogs - Weather News (http://www.accuweather.com/news-top-headline.asp?partner=accuweather&traveler=0&date=2010-01-09_20:30)

Kristy

01-12-2010, 01:54 PM

I'm really beginning to believe that the whole global warming/cooling argument is nothing more than one big profit margin for scientist who have more or less stop worrying about the state of the planet and starting putting their grant money into hedge funds and CD accounts. The news to this latest cold snap has been more than reactionary, most of it brought on by deaths which brings every conspiratorial nutcase out of the woodwork blaming the other side for the current events.

To me, it's no different from the marijuana arguments on who is actually doing the research and who is funding it. If you have a anti-drug group manipulating the government saying marijuana is evil then of course the scientist who do the "research" are without a doubt going to find a lot of discrepancies with marijuana. If you have a pro-marijuana group hiring scientist to do the same research of course they going to find all the benefits of marijuana. I'm cynical enough to believe it's the same scientist delivering different data to their clients as long as they are being paid.

So now you have a fresh set of downs with this brutal winter in many parts of the world claiming that we will experience another ice age on the horizon while others continue to claim the polar caps are still shrinking faster than a George Costanza penis after swimming. In the meantime, those we trust to do the research of what is really causing such dramatic shifts in the earth's climate can't say for sure - but this doesn't stop them from taking on more and more grant money.

Blackflag

01-12-2010, 02:49 PM

Hey, I think Kristy finally realized that money talks and bullshit walks. How old are you again?

At least she's not "Head Fluffer" any more.

Nickdfresh

01-13-2010, 08:46 AM

Yea - Because RECORD cold weather is has been discredited.... :umm:

...

So "discredited," that you have to post intentionally misleading lies in "news" stories. Yeah, got'cha, idiot...

BTW, keep posting the retarded "it's cold outside, Global Climate Change can't be real" idiocy. Because, I can post pictures of any scene which would mean the earth is flat, because the ground surely looks flat! So the earth being a globe must be a conspiracy!

You can go back to lighting your farts on fire now...

Fuct Jup

01-13-2010, 09:44 AM

So "discredited," that you have to post intentionally misleading lies in "news" stories. Yeah, got'cha, idiot...

Show me what's misleading about record temps. :hee:

How can there be global warming if its record cold outside? Still worried about those sea levels rising?

Fuct Jup

01-13-2010, 09:47 AM

So "discredited," that you have to post intentionally misleading lies in "news" stories. Yeah, got'cha, idiot...

For years now, we have been told that science is dedicatedly attempting to find out how the Earth’s Climate works. With all possible seriousness, the most publically vocal of these scientists, those working for the UN’s IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), have for the last several years blamed the warming they “found” on Carbon Dioxide. With the release of the CRU (Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia) email database, it is very clearly apparent that the scientists involved with the IPCC were doctoring data to give a specific result. That result was designed to look as if CO2was causing climate change, warming the earth due to Human activities. It can be reported now that this theory has been solidly disproven by Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi and Dr. Miskolczi’s work will make history.

Constants

To give context to this discovery, a short lesson in science is needed. The term “Constant” is very well known in science. Simply put it is a part of an equation (An equation is merely a mathematical sentence, the Variables are the words) that does not change; they are specific and represent solid concepts. You may have heard of Bohr’s Constant, Hubble ’s Constant, Avogadro’s Constant, there are many of them. There is a new Constant; one that has not been named, but if history is any guide it will be called the Miskolczi Constant, named for the physicist who discovered it.

A Constant we are all familiar with is the speed of light. Before Einstein and his famous theory of Relativity E=MC2, it was widely believed there was no limit on speed, just throw a rock from a speeding train and the speed will continue to add up. Einstein and his theory of Special Relativity put a specific limit on speed - the speed of light, beyond which nothing could go. There is a strict energetic limit, and we have recognized that for decades now. Before Miskolczi, it was generally thought that the greenhouse effect could be increased infinitely by adding more and more CO2 molecules into the air. Under the conditions prevailing on Earth, Miskolczi has proved that there is a limit to the greenhouse temperature that cannot be raised. Why is that? The IPCC has been telling us the exact opposite for years. Simple, because just as with Einstein’s E=MC2, there is a strict energetic limit as the Miskolczi Law proves.

Dr. Miskolczi’s Constant was discovered with a program that is the result of a project started 25 years ago in Hungary. It was then he began the process of writing a high-resolution radiative transfer program which would describe the Earth’s climate using the TIGR Global radiosonde archive of the Laboratoire de Meteorologie Dynamique, Paris database. With this information he was able to accurately describe mathematically how the atmosphere absorbs and releases heat using a long standing Equation called the Schwarzschild-Milne transfer equation to accurately calculate the Earths infrared optical depth. That is what Global climate is; the process by which Earth either holds onto or releases heat. The IPCC and the CRU scientists would have us believe that CO2 increases the heat the atmosphere holds on an infinite unlimited basis. That conclusion is absolutely false, and the CRU and the IPCC have had to falsify and invent data to make it appear that it does.

In reality water is so overwhelming abundant on Earth, it dominatingly, completely, and overwhelmingly governs the climate equilibrium of the Earth. It is 71% of the total surface area of the planet, 333 Million cubic miles (a cubic mile is an imaginary cube measuring one mile on each side) of water exist here, by far outweighing all other greenhouse gasses.

Can our climate undergo changes due to the addition of greenhouse gasses? Yes, but only under circumstances great enough to overwhelm the presence of 333 million Cubic miles of water, such as the impact of a large Asteroid and the tremendous heat it would add instantly. Carbon Dioxide is very far inside the greenhouse effect’s self-regulatory barriers. Amounts even double our current emissions, cannot overwhelm this equilibrium. Only the Sun has that immense amount of power, and only water exists in quantities large enough to effect such a change. As long as the sun’s activity is the “business-as-usual” fluctuations and there is water on Earth, CO2 cannot cause or increase global warming.

Equilibrium

In order to correctly understand why this is, it is necessary to recognize that what is important here is the equilibrium between the incoming energy from the sun (heating) and the outgoing longwave (infra red) energy (cooling). The 40% of the planet that is not cloud covered at any given time allows for solar radiation to be absorbed at the surface. The most effective form of cooling is the evaporation of water, which takes heat energy from the surface and puts it into the air. Clouds form which do three things: 1) create more cloud cover reflecting solar radiation away from the planet which also 2) releases heat into the very high upper atmosphere where it too is radiated out into space as the clouds condense into precipitation, and 3) drops much cooler water back down to the surface cooling things even further. This is an oversimplification for the sake of brevity and clarity, the interactions here are very complex as is the equation which describes it (the detailed mathematics can be found below in "The Saturated Greenhouse Effect Theory of Ferenc Miskolczi"). However, this does not change the simple fact that our planetary climate system is at equilibrium, and the Miskolczi Constant allows science to completely describe that equilibrium. For the first time, we can do so accurately with raw data, and match observed data with the results. No “hide the decline” needed when simply describing reality.

Hungarian Physicist Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi proves CO2 emissions irrelevant in Earth?s Climate (http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-7715-Portland-Civil-Rights-Examiner~y2010m1d12-Hungarian-Physicist-Dr-Ferenc-Miskolczi-proves-CO2-emissions-irrelevant-in-Earths-Climate)

Fuct Jup

01-13-2010, 09:49 AM

You can go back to lighting your farts on fire now...

you want me to add to the warming? I can't do that, the warming alarmists will tax my ass for sure. :fufu:

Fuct Jup

01-13-2010, 10:00 AM

So "discredited," that you have to post intentionally misleading lies in "news" stories. ...

More lies...

Is it getting hot in here?

Man dies from hypothermia in Miami... *

A 77-year-old man died of hypothermia Tuesday in what could be considered the first death in Miami that could be attributed to the record cold weather that has lingered in the city.

Wilfredo Arreyes died at Jackson Memorial Hospital and his roommate Miguel Alemon, 93, is still in critical condition after the two spent days in the frigid cold weather with no heat or covers in their apartment on Northwest 10th Avenue and Northwest 2nd Street in Little Havana.

The Miami-Dade Medical Examiner's Office will do an autopsy to determine if something else may have contributed to the Arreyes' death.

Police and fire rescue officials found the two men inside their apartment huddled together on Friday night. Arreyes was already unconscious and Alemon was semi-conscious, officials said. There was no heat in the apartment and there did not appear to be any covers for the men to get warm.

Temperatures have dipped into the 30s several times over the past two weeks and freeze warnings have been in effect for Miami and other parts of South Florida for a few days now.

Police were notified of the plight of the men by a third roommate, who was out of town and became concerned after he couldn't get his phone calls answered.

Miami's First Cold Weather Death Confirmed | NBC Miami (http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local-beat/Miamis-First-Cold-Weather-Death-Confirmed-81248747.html)

Nickdfresh

01-13-2010, 10:23 AM

...one of the U.N.'s top global warming proponents says could mark the beginning of a mini ice age.

Oranges are freezing and millions of tropical fish are dying in Florida, and it could be just the beginning of a decades-long deep freeze, says Professor Mojib Latif, one of the world's leading climate modelers.

Latif thinks the cold snap Americans have been suffering through is only the beginning. He says we're in for 30 years of cooler temperatures -- a mini ice age, he calls it, basing his theory on an analysis of natural cycles in water temperatures in the world's oceans....]

...
The guy has repeatedly explained his position and it has been deliberately or stupidly misreported and misunderstood again and again.

Leading climate scientist challenges Mail on Sunday's use of his research | Environment | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/11/climate-change-global-warming-mojib-latif)

.

From the above link:

A leading scientist has hit out at misleading newspaper reports that linked his research to claims that the current cold weather undermines the scientific case for manmade global warming.

Mojib Latif, a climate expert at the Leibniz Institute at Kiel University in Germany, said he "cannot understand" reports that used his research to question the scientific consensus on climate change.

He told the Guardian: "It comes as a surprise to me that people would try to use my statements to try to dispute the nature of global warming. I believe in manmade global warming. I have said that if my name was not Mojib Latif it would be global warming."

He added: "There is no doubt within the scientific community that we are affecting the climate, that the climate is changing and responding to our emissions of greenhouse gases."

Who's lying, retard? Nice job at thread-spamming with redundant, meaningless drivel of the stupid and completely trying to ignore my point though.

Nickdfresh

01-13-2010, 10:24 AM

you want me to add to the warming? I can't do that, the warming alarmists will tax my ass for sure. :fufu:

Why? Do you whore your ass out in Nevada --where it's legal?:anal::dickhead:

Fuct Jup

01-13-2010, 10:25 AM

Why? Do you whore your ass out in Nevada --where it's legal?:anal::dickhead:

No you can't pay for it fag.

Nickdfresh

01-13-2010, 10:27 AM

...
Hungarian Physicist Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi proves CO2 emissions irrelevant in Earth?s Climate (http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-7715-Portland-Civil-Rights-Examiner~y2010m1d12-Hungarian-Physicist-Dr-Ferenc-Miskolczi-proves-CO2-emissions-irrelevant-in-Earths-Climate)

Thanks shithead. He's a "physicist." Can climate change scientists now dispute or theorize about Quantum Physics?

I know his credentials and qualifications sound really impressive to stupid people who don't read much, are scientifically ignorant and less adept then a sixth grader who pays attention in class, and who choose to believe the corporate spam fed to them like good bitches (because it makes them feel better and enables their comforting denial): i.e. viewers of the Fox "News" network. But it's still largely meaningless drivel designed to turn the Global Warming science and truth into a "public debate" using sophistry--largely at the behest of corporate donors who've much vested in the current system of pollution and emissions and their profitability...

Fuct Jup

01-13-2010, 10:28 AM

From the above link:

A leading scientist has hit out at misleading newspaper reports that linked his research to claims that the current cold weather undermines the scientific case for manmade global warming.

Mojib Latif, a climate expert at the Leibniz Institute at Kiel University in Germany, said he "cannot understand" reports that used his research to question the scientific consensus on climate change.

He told the Guardian: "It comes as a surprise to me that people would try to use my statements to try to dispute the nature of global warming. I believe in manmade global warming. I have said that if my name was not Mojib Latif it would be global warming."

He added: "There is no doubt within the scientific community that we are affecting the climate, that the climate is changing and responding to our emissions of greenhouse gases."

Who's lying, retard? Nice job at thread-spamming with redundant, meaningless drivel of the stupid and completely trying to ignore my point though.

The point that you listen to corrupt scientists and ignore the fact that earth is slipping into a cooler period?

Nickdfresh

01-13-2010, 10:33 AM

No you can't pay for it fag.

Thanks for the offer, but I prefer vagina...

Nickdfresh

01-13-2010, 10:36 AM

The point that you listen to corrupt scientists and ignore the fact that earth is slipping into a cooler period?

LOL You, using your bountiful sources of (mis)information, have just spent years denying that scientists can determine if the world is truly getting hotter, or if man made emissions contribute to it...

Now you're using selectively cherry-picked "facts" to determine that the world is getting "colder" based on a couple of winters?

You're making yourself look like a complete ass to anyone beyond a 12th grade education...

Fuct Jup

01-13-2010, 10:43 AM

LOL You, using your bountiful sources of (mis)information, have just spent years denying that scientists can determine if the world is truly getting hotter, or if man made emissions contribute to it...

Now you're using selectively cherry-picked "facts" to determine that the world is getting "colder" based on a couple of winters?

You're making yourself look like a complete ass to anyone beyond a 12th grade education...

Yea - because a fucking MOD on a DLR fan site has so many accolades in life. :hee:

Douchebefresh you are a joke. Take Al Gore's cock and balls out of your mouth for a minute and turn up the thermostat.

Nickdfresh

01-13-2010, 10:59 AM

Yea - because a fucking MOD on a DLR fan site has so many accolades in life. :hee:

Thanks for the acknowledgment that you're thoroughly owned, and the argument is over...:)

Being a mod at a DLR site better than being a shitty poster at a Van Hagar one, Link's douche!

Douchebefresh you are a joke. Take Al Gore's cock and balls out of your mouth for a minute and turn up the thermostat.

Right (Now!), after you take Sammy's out of yours. :)

DEMON CUNT

01-13-2010, 08:32 PM

Sure, yeah. Record cold temperatures are proof that climate change is a myth. Ha ha!

"How can I be out of money? I still have checks left!"

Fuct Jup

02-10-2010, 11:05 AM

Global Warming? :biggrin:

Chicago Area Local News - The seemingly endless snowstorm is finally moving out of the area Wednesday morning, after leaving more than a foot of snow on the ground in many parts of the area and shattering a record for the date.

The official snowfall for Tuesday was 12.6 inches, measured at O'Hare International Airport, which set a new daily record snowfall for the month of February. The last record for daily snowfall for February in Chicago was 11.5 inches, set on Feb. 18, 1908.

The National Weather Service says the snowfall also shattered a record for total snowfall on Feb. 9. The last record was set in 1885, when 8.5 inches of snow fell in Chicago.

Tuesday was also the seventh greatest calendar day snowfall ever in Chicago, the National Weather Service reported. The list of the greatest daily snowfalls is topped with snowstorms of legend – Jan. 2, 1999; Jan. 13, 1979; and Jan. 26, 1967. The other daily snow totals greater than Tuesday were in 1939, 1918 and 1930.

CBS 2's Mary Kay Kleist says more light snow was reported at O'Hare early on Wednesday morning, and blowing and drifting is expected. The system is moving out of the area, except in Northwest Indiana, where a couple additional inches of accumulation are expected.

The winter storm warning in effect for most of the day Tuesday and early Wednesday has been canceled, although a winter weather advisory remains in effect until 2 p.m. for Lake, Porter, Jasper, Newton and Benton counties in Indiana, and a winter storm warning is in effect until 6 p.m. farther east in Indiana.

The snow caused problems all across the area. Several schools were closed. Night classes were called off at Northeastern Illinois University.

CBS 2 Meterologist Steve Baskerville says that several schools have also canceled class Wednesday due to the weather.

The County Building and court system in Lake County, Ind., were also closed due to the snow, prompting frustration from many who came to the buildings for scheduled appointments or court dates. Signs were posted in orange highlighter announcing the courts were shut down.

That didn't sit well with those headed to their court dates, many of whom took the day off work to find a handwritten sign in orange highlighter telling them the courts were closed.

"I'm using days I could have used for something else," said Indiana resident Nicole Simpson, who took a picture of the sign to show her boss she wasn't lying.

Leaving the area might have been tempting, but that was no easy feat either. More than 600 flights were canceled at O'Hare, and at Midway, Southwest Airlines canceled all flights until 10 a.m. Wednesday.

The snow also came in the midst of delays on commuter trains Tuesday morning.

The morning commute on Tuesday was tough for people in Northwest Indiana. CBS 2 Executive Producer of Digital Media John Dodge reported the South Shore line from Northwest Indiana was brought to its knees when a train broke down Tuesday morning, resulting in delays of 90 minutes on the line. Mechanical problems also caused delays on the Metra Milwaukee Northwest and SouthWest Service lines.

The snow was particularly frustrating for people trying to drive in it.

"We haven't made it to work yet. We were supposed to be there at 7," said John Evan, who was two and half hours late for work Tuesday morning.

City crews and the Illinois Department of Transportation had their full fleet of salt trucks and snow plows out all day, and for some, the drive in wasn't that awful.

"Actually it was better," said Greg Bauer. "Not as many people were out and the road crews did a great job."

And if you're a CTA commuter, service cuts that have extended your wait time became that much harder to swallow.

"It's been a challenge these last few days of having the buses not come as often," said Katie Cerney. "This is the worst day that you could have the buses not coming as often."

By mid-afternoon, the snowfall gained in intensity downtown, and officials are warning that the commute home, either by bus train or car, could be longer than normal.

In near north suburban Evanston, a Snow Emergency is in effect, and residents will have to move their cars to the odd-numbered sides of the streets Wednesday, then to the even-numbered sides of the streets on Thursday.

Evanston's emergency sirens will sound at 7:15 a.m. and 12:15 p.m. on Snow Emergency days to remind residents of the parking restrictions. Parking is also banned on Evanston's main thoroughfares between 11 p.m. Tuesday and 6 a.m. on Wednesday, to allow the city to effectively clear the snow.

More Than A Foot Of Snow Clobbers Chicago Area - cbs2chicago.com (http://cbs2chicago.com/local/snow.foot.chicago.2.1481078.html)

Fuct Jup

02-10-2010, 11:08 AM

The climate report from the National Weather Service was just posted and the word out of BWI-Marshall airport is that 4″ of snow fell on February 9th, pushing the winter total snowfall to 64.4″, which makes the winter of 2009-’10 the snowiest winter on record for Baltimore. The old record of 62.5″ didn’t last very long; it was set in the winter of 1995-’96. Official snow records go back to 1883 (other weather records date back to 1871, but for some reason snowfall records begin in 1883), and only three times prior to this winter was there more than 50″ of snow in a single winter season, most recently in 2002-’03 when 58.1″ fell. This year’s record breaking snowfall is significant in that the record was broken with more than half of February and all of March still looming for potential snowstorms.

In fact the snow is still falling tonight and the coastal low appears to be intensifying as it moves north toward Virginia Beach. Lightning strikes are now showing up over the Atlantic Ocean east of the Virginia/North Carolina state line. A general 4-8″ snowfall blanketed the area Tuesday evening. Wednesday morning the upper level low over Kentucky is forecast to move east, causing the coastal storm to “bomb” into a powerful nor’easter with additional snow likely to wrap around the west side of the storm into Maryland. Expected snowfall totals have been cut back a few inches due to the intrusion of some freezing rain and sleet, but a general 10-16″ accumulation is still expected by Wednesday evening along with strong, gusty northwest winds from Wednesday afternoon into Thursday.

InstaWeather Insights (http://www.wbaltv.com/blogometer/index.html)

bueno bob

02-10-2010, 12:33 PM

"It's cold outside! Global warming is fake!"

Every winter I listen to the same bullshit. Of course, these fucking idiots couldn't be bothered to look at ALL of the models that display that the road to global warming is PAVED by colder winters and hotter summers.

Why? Because they're conservatives, and these kinds of people hand pick among the facts to support their own theories rather than looking at a global overall picture. In essence, they're sewing their treasures in Heaven rather than worrying about their own backyard, much to the detriment of everybody.

kwame k

02-10-2010, 01:58 PM

Why does this remind me of what the Tobacco companies did for years.....deny that their product causes cancer, obfuscate the research, bring in Paid-for-Scientists, and discredit all the credible research for their own purposes.

Does anyone here actually believe the ocean currents do not regulate our climate? It's simple chemistry....add more fresh water to salt water and what happens? Plain and simple. More fresh water in our oceans will change our climate, period.....Oh yeah, those satellite photos showing the ice melting are fake or we are actually growing more ice....it's fucking winter you morons, what the fuck do you think will happen? Look at it over a period of time and you'll see that we are losing our Glaciers. Look at a photo from the 70's and superimpose an exact picture today and what do you see?

FORD

02-10-2010, 02:03 PM

Warmest January on record for Seattle

The National Weather Service says last month was the warmest January on record in Seattle, an average of 47 degrees.

SEATTLE —

The National Weather Service says last month was the warmest January on record in Seattle, an average of 47 degrees.

That was about a half-degree warmer than the old record set in 2006. Seattle records go back to 1891.

Forecasters say the average daily high at Sea-Tac Airport was nearly 52 degrees, about 6 degrees above normal. The average low was the month was about 43, about 7 degrees above normal.

Bellingham also had its warmest January on record, averaging 45 degrees. And Olympia had its second-warmest January, averaging nearly 44 degrees.

The Weather Service says Spokane averaged 35 degrees. That's about 8 degrees above normal and the eighth-warmest in the past 130 years. Spokane had just 1.4 inches of snow. That's fourth-lowest.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2010948491_apwawarmjanuary.html

Good news is, the utility bills are lower. Bad news is, I'm battling the worst case of mold that I've seen since 1991.

ELVIS

02-10-2010, 02:31 PM

Dude, take a bath !!

So, I suppose Seattle would be in need of purchasing carbon credits...

LMAO!

:elvis:

Nickdfresh

02-10-2010, 02:45 PM

The climate report from the National Weather Service was just posted and the word out of BWI-Marshall airport is that 4″ of snow fell on February 9th, pushing the winter total snowfall to 64.4″, which makes the winter of 2009-’10 the snowiest winter on record for Baltimore. The old record of 62.5″ didn’t last very long; it was set in the winter of 1995-’96. Official snow records go back to 1883 (other weather records date back to 1871, but for some reason snowfall records begin in 1883), and only three times prior to this winter was there more than 50″ of snow in a single winter season, most recently in 2002-’03 when 58.1″ fell. This year’s record breaking snowfall is significant in that the record was broken with more than half of February and all of March still looming for potential snowstorms.

None of this has anything to do with actual "temperatures", interestingly...

In fact the snow is still falling tonight and the coastal low appears to be intensifying as it moves north toward Virginia Beach. Lightning strikes are now showing up over the Atlantic Ocean east of the Virginia/North Carolina state line. A general 4-8″ snowfall blanketed the area Tuesday evening. Wednesday morning the upper level low over Kentucky is forecast to move east, causing the coastal storm to “bomb” into a powerful nor’easter with additional snow likely to wrap around the west side of the storm into Maryland. Expected snowfall totals have been cut back a few inches due to the intrusion of some freezing rain and sleet, but a general 10-16″ accumulation is still expected by Wednesday evening along with strong, gusty northwest winds from Wednesday afternoon into Thursday.

InstaWeather Insights (http://www.wbaltv.com/blogometer/index.html)

Right! One of the key concerns regarding Global Climate Change is the increasingly erratic weather patterns and the severity of storms that often take place before or after the traditional winter snowfall periods.

Thanks for highlighting this concern!

FORD

02-10-2010, 02:46 PM

Well, the worst part about all of this, is that the Winter Olympics are about to start up in Vancouver, and they aren't much colder than we are. All the indoor ice events will do alright, because that's all artificial anyway. I'm not sure how good the snow events will be though, because even in the mountains, it's not gonna be prime conditions.

Nickdfresh

02-10-2010, 02:50 PM

Wednesday, Feb. 10, 2010
Another Blizzard: What Happened to Global Warming?
By Bryan Walsh

As the blizzard-bound residents of the mid-Atlantic region get ready to dig themselves out of the third major storm of the season, they may stop to wonder two things: Why haven't we bothered to invest in a snow blower, and what happened to climate change? After all, it stands to reason that if the world is getting warmer — and the past decade was the hottest on record — major snowstorms should become a thing of the past, like PalmPilots and majority rule in the Senate. Certainly that's what the Virginia state Republican Party thinks: the GOP aired an ad last weekend that attacked two Democratic members of Congress for supporting the 2009 carbon-cap-and-trade bill, using the recent storms to cast doubt on global warming. (See pictures of the massive blizzard in Washington, D.C.)

Brace yourselves now — this may be a case of politicians twisting the facts. There is some evidence that climate change could in fact make such massive snowstorms more common, even as the world continues to warm. As the meteorologist Jeff Masters points out in his excellent blog at Weather Underground, the two major storms that hit Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington, D.C., this winter — in December and during the first weekend of February — are already among the 10 heaviest snowfalls those cities have ever recorded. The chance of that happening in the same winter is incredibly unlikely.

But there have been hints that it was coming. The 2009 U.S. Climate Impacts Report found that large-scale cold-weather storm systems have gradually tracked to the north in the U.S. over the past 50 years. While the frequency of storms in the middle latitudes has decreased as the climate has warmed, the intensity of those storms has increased. That's in part because of global warming — hotter air can hold more moisture, so when a storm gathers it can unleash massive amounts of snow. Colder air, by contrast, is drier; if we were in a truly vicious cold snap, like the one that occurred over much of the East Coast during parts of January, we would be unlikely to see heavy snowfall. (See pictures of the effects of global warming.)

Climate models also suggest that while global warming may not make hurricanes more common, it could well intensify the storms that do occur and make them more destructive. (Comment on this story.)

But as far as winter storms go, shouldn't climate change make it too warm for snow to fall? Eventually that is likely to happen — but probably not for a while. In the meantime, warmer air could be supercharged with moisture and, as long as the temperature remains below 32°F, it will result in blizzards rather than drenching winter rainstorms. And while the mid-Atlantic has borne the brunt of the snowfall so far this winter, areas near lakes may get hit even worse. As global temperatures have risen, the winter ice cover over the Great Lakes has shrunk, which has led to even more moisture in the atmosphere and more snow in the already hard-hit Great Lakes region, according to a 2003 study in the Journal of Climate. (Read "Climate Accord Suggests a Global Will, if Not a Way.")

Ultimately, however, it's a mistake to use any one storm — or even a season's worth of storms — to disprove climate change (or to prove it; some environmentalists have wrongly tied the lack of snow in Vancouver, the site of the Winter Olympic Games, which begin this week, to global warming). Weather is what will happen next weekend; climate is what will happen over the next decades and centuries. And while our ability to predict the former has become reasonably reliable, scientists are still a long way from being able to make accurate projections about the future of the global climate. Of course, that doesn't help you much when you're trying to locate your car under a foot of powder.

Snowstorm: East Coast Blizzard Tied to Climate Change - TIME (http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1962294,00.html)

Nickdfresh

02-10-2010, 02:59 PM

FORD

02-10-2010, 03:01 PM

Why does this remind me of what the Tobacco companies did for years.....deny that their product causes cancer, obfuscate the research, bring in Paid-for-Scientists, and discredit all the credible research for their own purposes.

It's the exact same tactics. Also being used by the pharmaceutical industry, and by MonSatan in defending their GMO mutated crops & high fructose corn poison.

Not to mention the horrible disinformation being spread by the corporate funded teabagger "movement", masquerading as "populist rage". Yeah, them Koch brothers - defense contractors and inlaws of the BCE - are real populists. :biggrin:

FORD

02-10-2010, 03:03 PM

Maybe the Winter Olympics should relocate all their outdoor events to the east coast?

ELVIS

02-10-2010, 04:28 PM

ULTRAMAN VH

02-10-2010, 05:45 PM

I should also add that not only these late season storms disruptive and annoying, they warmer temps. close to the freezing mark also result in heavy, wet snows that can bring down powerlines, collapse roofs on buildings, and splinter and topple trees...

This was a big problem in Buffalo during the early "October Storm" of 2006, which was unprecedented...

Sorry Weather Wizard, but the snow hammering MD right now is dry and powdery. And the wind is blowing rather briskly, kinda like your mouth on Fords cock. Tonight we are due for temps in the teens and wind gusts, up to 45 mph. Nothing wet or warm about this storm or the other two we've had.:umm:

Blackflag

02-10-2010, 05:52 PM

Blackflag

02-10-2010, 05:55 PM

Wait, is this the same thread from a couple weeks ago? What's wrong with you people?

PETE'S BROTHER

02-10-2010, 05:59 PM

Wait, is this the same thread from a couple weeks ago? What's wrong with you people?

ketchup is still goin' ! but it turned a little .....gay.:(

Blackflag

02-10-2010, 06:22 PM

That happens a lot around here. It's not my doing.

Nickdfresh

02-10-2010, 07:48 PM

Sorry Weather Wizard, but the snow hammering MD right now is dry and powdery.

I found your mother's vagina kind of dry and powdery too...

And the wind is blowing rather briskly, kinda like your mouth on Fords cock.

Egads, such associations. Thanks Lt. Dangle!

Tonight we are due for temps in the teens and wind gusts, up to 45 mph. Nothing wet or warm about this storm or the other two we've had.:umm:

If you read my post(s) very carefully, captain shit for brains, you'll see I never said nor implied it was "wet" nor "warm," just like you manage to make women feel neither wet nor warm....

Nickdfresh

02-10-2010, 07:51 PM

He's making it up as he goes along...:biggrin:

Much like the idiots you get your "religion" (and conspiracy theories) from...

BTW, Global Climate Change theory has a hell of a lot more evidence than your particular stilted view of Christianity ever had...

FORD

02-10-2010, 10:05 PM

Dude, take a bath !!

So, I suppose Seattle would be in need of purchasing carbon credits...

LMAO!

:elvis:

I actually had to run my fucking A/C for a while today. Not because it was too warm, but because its the only way to suck the goddamned humidity out of the air inside my fucking house. I can always turn the heat on later, but at least it won't be a sauna when I do.

If I have to keep doing this in February, I might actually NEED the carbon credits! :(

Baby's On Fire

02-10-2010, 10:19 PM

I actually had to run my fucking A/C for a while today. Not because it was too warm, but because its the only way to suck the goddamned humidity out of the air inside my fucking house. I can always turn the heat on later, but at least it won't be a sauna when I do.

If I have to keep doing this in February, I might actually NEED the carbon credits! :(

Why didn't you just pray to the Lord Almighty...Jesus Christ?

That would have been much cheaper and your call would have been answered.

After all, Jesus loves you...Elvis says so (as long as you're white and are fortunate enough to have "health (i.e. drug) care".

FORD

02-10-2010, 10:21 PM

I figured if Jesus is sparing us in the Northwest from the cold winter, it's best not to ask Him for too much. :)

Baby's On Fire

02-10-2010, 10:23 PM

Much like the idiots you get your "religion" (and conspiracy theories) from...

BTW, Global Climate Change theory has a hell of a lot more evidence than your particular stilted view of Christianity ever had...

Are you implying that the image of the Virgin Mary in a stack of flap jacks in some diner isn't proof of God?

Burn in hell...you pagan.

That's all the proof of God you'll ever need (or you'll ever fucking get for that matter).

oops..pardon me...there was the tree crying the tears of the Cunt Mary in Italy or some such place...You see it's true....all the religiuous nuts witnessed it....(it doesn't matter they all came from the same LSD party)...It's true....prooof of God.

Baby's On Fire

02-10-2010, 10:25 PM

I figured if Jesus is sparing us in the Northwest from the cold winter, it's best not to ask Him for too much. :)

Well...He sure as fuck won't give you much...not matter what you ask for. No need to worry about that.

"Hey Jesus...why all the suffering in the World?"...."well my son...It's GOD'S WAY...best not to question...or you'll BURN IN HELL!!!!"

kwame k

02-10-2010, 11:22 PM

Blackflag

02-10-2010, 11:32 PM

That would require him to leave the house.

Seshmeister

02-11-2010, 06:02 AM

Not at all...:)

Air Dehumidifier.com -- Your FREE guide to Dehumidifier online (http://www.airdehumidifier.com/)

Fuct Jup

02-11-2010, 10:11 AM

The Blizzard of 2010 is pretty much over, but before the snow even stopped falling, it helped Philadelphia make history.

This is officially the snowiest winter season in the city's recorded history, according to the National Weather Service.

More than 70.3-inches of snow fell in Philadelphia so far this season and it's not even over.

"This is almost beyond words," said Meteorologist Glenn "Hurricane" Schwartz. "No matter how old you are, you probably will never experience a winter like this in your lifetime, again."

The last record was only set 14 years ago during the Blizzard of 1996 when 65.5 inches fell -- 33 inches of which were dumped during that storm.

This latest storm has dumped over 14 inches in Philly and higher amounts are being tallied in the northern and western suburbs. Here are some of the highest measurements so far:

Wilmington, Del. -- 12.8 inches
Bear, Del. -- 12.8 inches
Ewing, N.J. -- 17.5
Cherry Hill, N.J. -- 13 inches
Boyerton, Pa. -- 23.3 inches
Perkasie, Pa. -- 21 inches
East Nantmeil, Pa. -- 26.8 inches
Allentown, Pa. -- 17.6 inches
Trappe, Pa. -- 21.8 inches
Elkins Park, Pa. -- 16.5 inches

We also had more stronger winter storms this season than ever. There are only two other seasons -- 1960-61 and 1978 -- that had more than one storm with 10 or more inches of accumulation since 1888, says Glenn. Neither of those seasons had storms that broke the 20 inch accumulation mark.

The heavy snow and strong winds caused officials to close highways and schools, shutter public transit and shut down cities.

Gov. Ed Rendell ordered the closure of the Schuylkill Expressway, Blue Route and Vine Street Expressway because driving conditions had become so hazardous. They are not expected to reopen until Thursday morning.

SEPTA, NJ Transit and BART in Del. all cancelled bus service at some point Wednesday and planes sat vacant at Philadelphia International Airport as flights were brought to a standstill. SEPTA plans to resume weekday service at 5 a.m. Thursday.

Power lines and building roofs tumbled under the weight of the fluff. In Townsend, Del., a firehouse needed to be closed after it’s roof collapsed.

People walking along Walnut Street in Center City dodged a fallen awning from the Jones New York store near 17th Street.

More than 150,000 homes are without power Wednesday night as falling trees took down lines. 120,000 of the outages are in the PECO service area. Officials say they have 450 workers on the streets working to get power restored, but admit it may take days to get eveyone back online.

Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter announced that the city would be closed Thursday as public safety and Streets department employees work to clean up the mess.

He urged that other employers allow residents to use Thursday as a "transition day" to shovel their sidewalks, dig out their cars and check on neighbors.

The mayor also asked residents to take their time while digging out. Philly EMS workers handled 14 cases of cardiac arrest Wednesday, a huge spike than the norm.

While many adults ponder if they'll make it into work, kids can rejoice since all city public and Catholic schools will be closed. Other districts are also following suit.

Even the animals were thrown off by the blizzard. A wayward Canadian goose wandered into the truck bay of our Bala Cynwyd, Pa. studios. Our staff gave her some shelter, a little food and a name -- Lucy -- before sending her on her way.

The blizzard conditions ended around 11 p.m. Wednesday as the storm moved further out to sea. But now we have to worry about freezing. The temperatures will tumble overnight turing slush to ice, making walking and driving even more dangerous.

It's Officially the Snowiest Winter in History | NBC Philadelphia (http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/breaking/Its-Officially-the-Snowiest-Winter-in-History-84065947.html)

Fuct Jup

02-11-2010, 10:14 AM

Statement as of 7:50 AM CST on February 11, 2010

Expires 1:00 AM EST on February 12, 2010

... Airport weather warning for dfw through midnight...

... A Winter Storm Warning is in effect for Tarrant and Dallas County
until midnight CST...

Periods of light to moderate snow will affect dfw Airport through the
evening with 4 to 6 inches of snow likely. The snow will end this
evening but residual precipitation will freeze or remain frozen as
temperatures fall into the upper 20s to lower 30s.

741 am CST Thu Feb 11 2010

... Winter Storm Warning in effect until midnight CST tonight...
... Winter Weather Advisory no longer in effect...

The National Weather Service in Fort Worth has issued a Winter
Storm Warning for heavy snow... which is in effect until midnight CST
tonight. The Winter Weather Advisory for snow is no longer in
effect.

Areas of snow are expected to continue across North Texas today as
a slow moving upper level storm system approaches from the west.
Snowfall accumulations of 4 to 6 inches are possible by this
evening... with locally higher amounts. The precipitation will end from
west to east overnight.

Road conditions will remain slick and hazardous through the day as
temperatures remain near or just below freezing and snow
continues to fall. Significant travel impacts are expected to
continue after the precipitation ends and into early Friday
morning as temperatures fall into the upper 20s to around 30.

This Winter Storm Warning means significant amounts of snow are
expected to make travel very hazardous or impossible.

Dallas / Fort Worth Weather - cbs11tv.com (http://weather.cbs11tv.com/US/TX/119.html)

Fuct Jup

02-11-2010, 10:19 AM

Several dry days, then chance of President's Day snow
I would wave a white flag to surrender, but no one would see it! I'm sure there are still a handful of snow lovers out there who haven't had enough yet, but may I speak for the majority of us who hope this is truly a once in a century event. The main problem today is still the wind. This is likely to hamper clearing roads and sidewalks until we get up to the freezing mark and the fluffy late-storm snow firms up. I am almost afraid to look at each new model run for fear of what the next potential storm -- an energetic disturbance diving south out of Canada that could produce snow around President's Day -- will turn into.

Today (Thursday): It will be a bright day with sunny skies reflecting off the fresh blanket of snow. Winds from the northwest at 15-25 mph lead to wind chills in the teens, and blowing and drifting snow in open areas resulting in occasionally low visibility. Highs struggle to reach the freezing mark. Confidence: High

Tonight: There will be a few clouds in the sky but the deep snow will still radiate the little bit of day time warming and leave most areas with lows in the mid-to-upper teens. Winds from the northwest around 12-18 mph lower wind chills to the single digits, so keep bundled up. Confidence: High

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitalweathergang/?hpid=topnews

Fuct Jup

02-11-2010, 10:42 AM

The potential criminality of the Climategate scandal is exactly the issue that is being investigated by authorities in Britain. The British Parliament has convened hearings to investigate East Anglia University and the Climate Research Unit to uncover unethical and illegal activities. As more information is revealed, the whole Climategate affair begins to take on the makings of a good mystery novel. Like any good mystery or crime plot, the web of involvement is widespread.

But in order for a reader to be drawn in, the author must establish the motive and opportunity for the crime to be believable. To understand Climategate, we must start at the center of the web. At the center is the now-discredited Dr. Phil Jones of East Anglia University and the work he orchestrated at the Climate Research Unit (CRU). This is exactly where the British Parliament has started its investigation for possible criminal wrongdoing.

The British investigation, headed up by Phil Willis, M.P., focuses on four areas: data manipulation, data suppression, violations of the Freedom of Information Act, and data integrity. Clearly, the recently uncovered e-mails will play a big role in this investigation. A new thread in this web has appeared recently concerning a separate investigation conducted by the European Law Enforcement Organization Cooperation (aka Europol). Investigators have found evidence of a complex carbon-trading scam on the European Climate Exchange. Just three short weeks ago, three British subjects were arrested in an apparent scam worth billions of dollars. Much of the criminal activity alleged involves tax evasion.

Trading on the European Climate Exchange is open to the world market, but the carbon credits only involve the European Union (EU) nations giving brokers the ability to hide trading activities in other countries and avoid paying taxes. This is known as a Carousel Fraud. Curiously, this thread of tax avoidance is also spun into the tangled web of e-mails from East Anglia University. In one of the e-mails dated 6 March 1996, two members of the Jones Gang, Stepan Shiyatov and Dr. Kieth Briffa, discuss how to avoid paying taxes in Russia:

Also, it is important for us if you can transfer the ADVANCE money on the personal accounts which we gave you earlier and the sum for one occasion transfer (for example, during one day) will not be more than 10,000 USD. Only in this case we can avoid big taxes and use money for our work as much as possible.

This is not an isolated e-mail concerning money. On 7 October 1997, Andrew Kerr of the World Wild Life Fund (WWF) sent an e-mail to essentially the entire global network of the Jones Gang expressing grave concerns that Kyoto would be a "flop" and fretted about the possible economic impact it might have:

It would also be very useful if progressive business groups would express their horror at the new economic opportunities which will be foregone if Kyoto is a flop.

Best wishes, Andrew

The question is, why would the WWF be interested in "new economic opportunities" if the Kyoto Accord were to fail? Aren't they supposed to save panda bears? As they say in Washington, "follow the money." One of the major benefactors of the WWF is the global banking giant HSBC Holdings plc. HSBC is a major trader on the European Climate Exchange. The public stance on climate was voiced by Stephen Green, a Group Chairman at HSBC:

Finding the solutions to climate change requires a concerted international effort involving governments, NGOs, intergovernmental institutions, the public and, of course, the business community. The HSBC Climate Partnership is an example of how different types of organizations can work together and has already been a catalyst for change in how we do business.

"A catalyst for change in how we do business"? Is that a way of saying market manipulation? By "involving" all of these "communities," is this a collaborative effort or a conspiracy? Is the WWF a member of these "communities"? The question must be asked whether the WWF is a tool of market manipulation?

With $31 billion in carbon credits being traded on the European Climate Exchange, there is certainly an incentive to commit fraud. These trades are dominated by banks like HSBC and energy companies like British Petroleum (another benefactor to the WWF). But how is an opportunity for fraud established? Unlike other commodities, like wheat or coffee, you can't ship a boxcar-load of carbon dioxide to the purchaser. The trades are done strictly on paper. The intangible nature of carbon credits provides the perfect opportunity for international fraud.

American Thinker: Climategate: Is It Criminal? (http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/climategate_is_it_criminal_1.html)

FORD

02-11-2010, 12:30 PM

As Thom Hartmann just pointed out, there's also a huge snowstorm in Afghanistan right now.

How do the climate change deniers interpret that one?

Thom thought it might be God's way of letting us know how He feels about the occupation of Afghanistan.

Or not.......

kwame k

02-11-2010, 02:03 PM

It's useless to get the, "spoon fed", to even realize what's happening, right in front of their faces.

More extreme weather, weather patterns changing, and areas that have been temperate are changing. Is all of it man made? No. Some of it is cyclic but you would think things that are as common sense as, pollution, dependence on foreign oil, and skyrocketing costs would be enough for these idiots to get on board.

Oh no! Penalizing the polluters....My God, the end is near. That's exactly what the Nazi's did in the 30's! Obama is trying to control you and make you submit. He is taking away your God given right to fuck this Planet up and rape it for all it's worth! Please.

What the fuck part of pollution is bad, don't you people get? Clean water, clean air and all the health problems that could occur in cities that don't reduce smog and pollution....so toxic land, water and air is a good thing and anyone who tells you differently is a Communist, please.

On the other end of the spectrum, the Green Movement is using the opposite in scare tactics but the same message, the end is near.

The tax carbon credit is just a fucking shell game and should be done away with. What should happen is the biggest polluters should be fined until they are in compliance. Oh but they'll raise the prices on everything if we do that! So, they are doing it now and will continue to do it as oil prices go up.

Look at the simple fact that we have used all the easily accessible oil up. These new huge oil strikes they are finding are deeper and harder to extract......Oil companies won't pass those costs on to the consumer, those guys would never spike prices and manipulate prices for profit....I trust them when they say there's no reason to stop using oil....

Here's another one....why is Warren Buffet buying up/investing in railroads? People think he's crazy. Nope, fucking brilliant. Over 80% of all goods are trucked to the stores. Gas prices go up, food and consumer products go up, period. So the guy who can deliver goods to the market cheaper and more efficient is going to make billions off of that. The ratio of tons of products moved, to cost per gallon to move those products is in the railroad's favor. The guy that controls that, controls prices and therefore, the profit. The fact that it's cleaner and more efficient is a happy by-product and a great PR campaign.

How about the fact that America is behind in manufacturing and leading the world in importing. Do you really want to be behind in coming up with alternative energy and being able to export that? Other countries are already committed to getting off the teat of oil and while all this bickering is going on in this country we are falling further behind in the race for new energy. National security and economic prosperity should trump what any scientist says, for good or ill.

Open your fucking eyes and if you don't believe the science or think the so-called, "green movement", is just another way to make a buck....think about this, a simple math problem.

If it takes Johnny millions of dollars extra to get his oil from the ground.....

Will Johnny;

a) keep the oil prices the same and lose or not make as much money as he did.
b) pass that cost on to the consumer.
c) just say fuck it and agree we need to ditch oil because it's too much of a pain in the ass to get.

I made it multiple guess for the mental giants out there.

PETE'S BROTHER

02-11-2010, 02:13 PM

C ?:biggrin:

kwame k

02-11-2010, 02:34 PM

C ?:biggrin:

Trick question, maybe ;)

Nickdfresh

02-11-2010, 05:03 PM

FORD

02-12-2010, 11:23 PM

Dr. Love

02-13-2010, 12:45 AM

definitive proof against global warming

<object width="512" height="296"><param name="movie" value="http://www.hulu.com/embed/PO5neH7p2P3JVppwhJuA-A"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.hulu.com/embed/PO5neH7p2P3JVppwhJuA-A" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" width="512" height="296"></embed></object>

BigBadBrian

02-13-2010, 08:04 AM

http://rlv.zcache.com/green_is_the_new_red_bumper_sticker-p128830723255697866trl0_400.jpg

Seshmeister

02-13-2010, 08:20 AM

http://www.epk.com/wp-content/uploads/stupid-Palin.png

.....

Baby's On Fire

02-13-2010, 06:56 PM

Where I live in "cold Canada", we have had virtually ZERO snow this winter...at most half an inch and it melted within days. MOST days have been well above freezing, with about 5 cold days since December.

Last year, in January, a dude walked past my house in shorts and a T-shirt...cuz it was about + 15 Celsius.

January 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009.....INSECTS were flying in the air it was so warm...trees were budding.

We haven't had a real winter since the late 1980s....IF we get snow...it melts within days.

And I live just outside the so-called snow belt.

Global cooling...my fucking ass.

Fuct Jup

02-15-2010, 08:12 AM

* Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing
* There has been no global warming since 1995
* Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made Changes

The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.
Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.
Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.
The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.
And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.
The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely man-made.
Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped down as director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit after the leaking of emails that sceptics claim show scientists were manipulating data.
The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the world and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster efforts by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions.

Following the leak of the emails, Professor Jones has been accused of ‘scientific fraud’ for allegedly deliberately suppressing information and refusing to share vital data with critics.
Discussing the interview, the BBC’s environmental analyst Roger Harrabin said he had spoken to colleagues of Professor Jones who had told him that his strengths included integrity and doggedness but not record-keeping and office tidying.
Mr Harrabin, who conducted the interview for the BBC’s website, said the professor had been collating tens of thousands of pieces of data from around the world to produce a coherent record of temperature change.
That material has been used to produce the ‘hockey stick graph’ which is relatively flat for centuries before rising steeply in recent decades.
According to Mr Harrabin, colleagues of Professor Jones said ‘his office is piled high with paper, fragments from over the years, tens of thousands of pieces of paper, and they suspect what happened was he took in the raw data to a central database and then let the pieces of paper go because he never realised that 20 years later he would be held to account over them’.
Asked by Mr Harrabin about these issues, Professor Jones admitted the lack of organisation in the system had contributed to his reluctance to share

But he denied he had cheated over the data or unfairly influenced the scientific process, and said he still believed recent temperature rises were predominantly man-made.
Asked about whether he lost track of data, Professor Jones said: ‘There is some truth in that. We do have a trail of where the weather stations have come from but it’s probably not as good as it should be.
‘There’s a continual updating of the dataset. Keeping track of everything is difficult. Some countries will do lots of checking on their data then issue improved data, so it can be very difficult. We have improved but we have to improve more.’
He also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not.

He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no ‘statistically significant’ warming, although he argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend.
And he said that the debate over whether the world could have been even warmer than now during the medieval period, when there is evidence of high temperatures in northern countries, was far from settled.
Sceptics believe there is strong evidence that the world was warmer between about 800 and 1300 AD than now because of evidence of high temperatures in northern countries.
But climate change advocates have dismissed this as false or only applying to the northern part of the world.
Professor Jones departed from this consensus when he said: ‘There is much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America, the North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia.
‘For it to be global in extent, the MWP would need to be seen clearly in more records from the tropical regions and the Southern hemisphere. There are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.
‘Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or warmer than today, then obviously the late 20th Century warmth would not be unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less warm than today, then the current warmth would be unprecedented.’
Sceptics said this was the first time a senior scientist working with the IPCC had admitted to the possibility that the Medieval Warming Period could have been global, and therefore the world could have been hotter then than now.
Professor Jones criticised those who complained he had not shared his data with them, saying they could always collate their own from publicly available material in the US. And he said the climate had not cooled ‘until recently – and then barely at all. The trend is a warming trend’.
Mr Harrabin told Radio 4’s Today programme that, despite the controversies, there still appeared to be no fundamental flaws in the majority scientific view that climate change was largely man-made.
But Dr Benny Pieser, director of the sceptical Global Warming Policy Foundation, said Professor Jones’s ‘excuses’ for his failure to share data were hollow as he had shared it with colleagues and ‘mates’.
He said that until all the data was released, sceptics could not test it to see if it supported the conclusions claimed by climate change advocates.
He added that the professor’s concessions over medieval warming were ‘significant’ because they were his first public admission that the science was not settled.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html#ixzz0fbslGUBQ

Fuct Jup

02-15-2010, 08:15 AM

Untold billions of pounds have been spent on turning the world green and also on financing the dubious trade in carbon credits.

Countless gallons of aviation fuel have been consumed carrying experts, lobbyists and politicians to apocalyptic conferences on global warming.
Every government on Earth has changed its policy, hundreds of academic institutions, entire school curricula and the priorities of broadcasters and newspapers all over the world have been altered – all to serve the new doctrine that man is overheating the planet and must undertake heroic and costly changes to save the world from drowning as the icecaps melt.
You might have thought that all this was based upon well-founded, highly competent research and that those involved had good reason for their blazing, hot-eyed certainty and their fierce intolerance of dissent.
But, thanks to the row over leaked emails from the Climatic Research Unit, we now learn that this body’s director, Phil Jones, works in a disorganised fashion amid chaos and mess.
Interviewed by the highly sympathetic BBC, which still insists on describing the leaked emails as ‘stolen’, Professor Jones has conceded that he ‘did not do a thorough job’ of keeping track of his own records.

His colleagues recall that his office was ‘often surrounded by jumbled piles of papers’.
Even more strikingly, he also sounds much less ebullient about the basic theory, admitting that there is little difference between global warming rates in the Nineties and in two previous periods since 1860 and accepting that from 1995 to now there has been no statistically significant warming.
He also leaves open the possibility, long resisted by climate change activists, that the ‘Medieval Warm Period’ from 800 to 1300 AD, and thought by many experts to be warmer than the present period, could have encompassed the entire globe.

This is an amazing retreat, since if it was both global and warmer, the green movement’s argument that our current position is ‘unprecedented’ would collapse.
It is quite reasonable to suggest that human activity may have had some effect on climate.

There is no doubt that careless and greedy exploitation has done much damage to the planet.

But in the light of the ‘Climategate’ revelations, it is time for governments, academics and their media cheerleaders to be more modest in their claims and to treat sceptics with far more courtesy.
The question is not settled.

'Supertaxes' always failThe Treasury appears to have waved goodbye to large sums of money it could have collected in tax from the super-rich, thanks to a poorly designed attempt to help the film industry.

Compare and contrast this laxity with the inescapable tax burden on ordinary people whose income is taxed at source and who are pursued with severity for every penny.
This sort of inequality is the direct result of ever more ‘creative’ attempts to use the tax system for social engineering.

As HM Revenue and Customs will find when the new 50 pence tax rate is imposed in April, higher rates stimulate the rich into ever more ingenious efforts to avoid paying up.
Taxes should be simple, low and fair. Then everyone will pay them.

Read more: MAIL ON SUNDAY COMMENT: The professor's amazing climate change retreat | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1250813/MAIL-ON-SUNDAY-COMMENT-The-professors-amazing-climate-change-retreat.html#ixzz0fbtBmd1g)

Fuct Jup

02-15-2010, 09:56 AM

Within hours of the launch of an independent panel to investigate claims that climate scientists covered up flawed data on temperatures rises, one member has been forced to resign after skeptics questioned his impartiality.

In an interview last year with Chinese State Radio, enquiry panel member Philip Campbell, editor-in-chief of Nature said: "The scientists have not hidden the data. If you look at the emails there is one or two bits of language that are jargon used between professionals that suggest something to outsiders that is wrong."

He went on: "In fact the only problem there has been is on some official restrictions on their ability to disseminate data otherwise they have behaved as researchers should."

Dr Campbell, was invited to sit on the enquiry panel because of his expertise in the peer review process as editor of one of the world’s leading science journals.

The journal has published some of the leading papers on climate change research, including those supporting the now famous "hockey stick" graph, the subject of intense criticism by climate sceptics.

Dr Campbell has now withdrawn his membership of the panel, telling Channel 4 News: "I made the remarks in good faith on the basis of media reports of the leaks.

"As I have made clear subsequently, I support the need to for a full review of the facts behind the leaked e-mails.

"There must be nothing that calls into question the ability of the independent Review to complete this task, and therefore I have decided to withdraw from the team."

The interview, posted on the Bishop Hill blog, run by climate sceptic Andrew Montford, will come as an embarrassment to the enquiry's chair Sir Muir Russell.

At a press conference this morning to launch the panel, the experienced civil servant and former vice-chancellor of Glasgow University, emphasised his hand-picked panel's impartiality.

A press release about the panel read: "They were selected on the basis that they have no prejudicial interest in climate change and climate science and for the contribution they can make to the issues of the review."

Speaking this evening, Muir Russell said "I have spoken to Philip Campbell, and I understand why he has withdrawn. I regret the loss of his expertise, but I respect his decision."

The revelation is evidence of the well-organised and highly-motivated campaign by climate change sceptics that has already used the emails leaked from University of East Anglia to make allegations about the validity of climate change science.

They have also been swift to attack errors in the influential United Nations intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC) report on the science of climate change, published in 2007.

Bob Ward, policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Changement said: "Some commentators have already taken on the role of judge and jury, pronouncing on the guilt of those involved and calling for their resignations.

"The Review team need to be fair to all concerned, but they may ultimately have difficulty persuading people to accept a verdict that does not match the conclusions that they have already reached themselves."

According to Ward, those with dissenting views about the dangers of climate change feel they have not been represented on the enquiry’s panel.

"They’re motivation here is probably because Nature published most of the papers on climate change that they are trying to discredit," he said.

"Who is actually carrying out this review?" leading climate sceptic Steve McIntyre told Channel 4 News.

"I think you need to have some truly independent statisticians or even people who are from unrelated fields."

"Some of the habits in the field are quite deeply rooted, and people have lost perspective on the type of assumptions and statistical bodges that are being done in this particular field," he said.

The Independent Climate Change Email Review will only be assessing the conduct of researchers at the UEA, not the conclusions of their scientific research.

They will examine the 1000 emails and 3000 other files hacked from the University, 160MB of data in total.

Under scrutiny will be analyses based on tree ring data, weather stations and reference to a "trick" and "hiding the decline" included in the emails.

The panel will also examine how the UEA researchers conducted peer review and whether they manipulated or suppressed information or whether, as one of the leaked emails suggests, controversial data was deliberately deleted.

"This review is about scientific rigour and honesty," Sir Muir said.

"We will investigate whether there is evidence of poor scientific practice and data management, which could call the CRU research into question.

However, the University of East Anglia also announced today that they would be working with the esteemed Royal Society to reassess the scientific conclusions of researchers working at the university's Climatic Research Unit.

"Published papers from CRU have gone through the rigorous and intensive peer review process, which is the keystone for maintaining the integrity of scientific research," said Professor Trevor Davies, the University's Pro-Vice- Chancellor for Research.

"Colleagues in the CRU have strenuously defended their conduct and the published work and we believe it is in the interests of all concerned that there should be an additional assessment considering the science itself."

The six-member panel now has a vacancy and will examine whether researchers abused the scientific process or deliberately withheld information from the public after emails were hacked from the University’s servers.

Like Sir Muir's enquiry, the East Anglia review is due to report "sometime in the spring"

'Climate-gate' review member resigns - Channel 4 News (http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/science_technology/aposclimategateapos+review+member+withdraws/3536642)

Seshmeister

02-15-2010, 04:04 PM

Daily Mail?

LMAO! :)

Igosplut

02-15-2010, 04:19 PM

I still think the truth lies somewhere in the middle of all this....

chefcraig

02-15-2010, 04:51 PM

Daily Mail?

LMAO! :)

Further "Breaking News" Headlines from the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html):

Killing with kindness: Indulgent grandparents 'overfeed' kids and make them fat, scientists warn (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1251258/Indulgent-grandparents-overfeed-kids-make-fat-scientists-warn.html)

Gardener 'lost it' and battered lecturer lover to death with a rock after 'she goaded him about his manhood' (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1251232/Gardener-killed-lecturer-lover-goaded-manhood.html)

Human fly scales wall using two vacuum cleaners he bought at Tesco (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1251157/So-long-suckers-Human-fly-scales-wall-using-vacuum-cleaners-bought-Tesco.html)

The girl whose hair fell out after using new Pantene shampoo (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250987/My-hair-fell-handfuls-I-tried-new-Pantene-shampoo.html)

Freediver breaks record for holding breath underwater... for 19 minutes and 21 seconds | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1251251/Freediver-breaks-record-holding-breath-underwater--19-minutes-21-seconds.html)

Seshmeister

02-15-2010, 04:58 PM

My favorite is the website that has compiled all their cancer stories.

Kill or cure? (http://kill-or-cure.heroku.com/)

FORD

02-15-2010, 05:34 PM

Daily Mail?

LMAO! :)

"...It's a steady job, but he wants to be a paperback writer..."

kwame k

02-15-2010, 07:41 PM

"...It's a steady job, but he wants to be a paperback writer..."

This thread could use some tunes.......

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wd1ZCcBhmv4&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wd1ZCcBhmv4&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Sgt Schultz

02-15-2010, 10:03 PM

http://rlv.zcache.com/green_is_the_new_red_bumper_sticker-p128830723255697866trl0_400.jpg

This hits the nail on the head.

Seshmeister

02-16-2010, 04:02 AM

It's really quite simple. Coal is too cheap which is fucking up the planet. Only governments can make coal more expensive.

BigBadBrian

02-16-2010, 05:49 AM

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

The Daily Mail

Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing
There has been no global warming since 1995
Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes

The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.

Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.

Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.

The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

ARTICLE

Bullshit

World may not be warming, say scientists
Times Online

The United Nations climate panel faces a new challenge with scientists casting doubt on its claim that global temperatures are rising inexorably because of human pollution.

In its last assessment the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the evidence that the world was warming was “unequivocal”.

It warned that greenhouse gases had already heated the world by 0.7C and that there could be 5C-6C more warming by 2100, with devastating impacts on humanity and wildlife. However, new research, including work by British scientists, is casting doubt on such claims. Some even suggest the world may not be warming much at all.

“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC.

The doubts of Christy and a number of other researchers focus on the thousands of weather stations around the world, which have been used to collect temperature data over the past 150 years.

These stations, they believe, have been seriously compromised by factors such as urbanisation, changes in land use and, in many cases, being moved from site to site.

ARTICLE

BigBadBrian

02-16-2010, 05:51 AM

It's all a hoax, people.

Now, which SUV am I gonna get?

It has to be big enough to carry both my kayaks.

bueno bob

02-16-2010, 06:28 AM

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

The Daily Mail

That's about as good a source as Weekly World News.

Wonder how much they've paid out in libel suits since, oh, 1899?

Seshmeister

02-16-2010, 07:46 AM

It's all a hoax, people.

Cancer?

Fuct Jup

02-16-2010, 08:32 AM

Daily Mail?
LMAO! :)
How about the BBC? Next your gonna tell me the BBC isn't a credible source. Interesting that the American left leaning media refuses to address this story.

Phil Jones is director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA), which has been at the centre of the row over hacked e-mails.

The BBC's environment analyst Roger Harrabin put questions to Professor Jones, including several gathered from climate sceptics. The questions were put to Professor Jones with the co-operation of UEA's press office.

A - Do you agree that according to the global temperature record used by the IPCC, the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998 were identical?

An initial point to make is that in the responses to these questions I've assumed that when you talk about the global temperature record, you mean the record that combines the estimates from land regions with those from the marine regions of the world. CRU produces the land component, with the Met Office Hadley Centre producing the marine component.

Temperature data for the period 1860-1880 are more uncertain, because of sparser coverage, than for later periods in the 20th Century. The 1860-1880 period is also only 21 years in length. As for the two periods 1910-40 and 1975-1998 the warming rates are not statistically significantly different (see numbers below).

I have also included the trend over the period 1975 to 2009, which has a very similar trend to the period 1975-1998.

So, in answer to the question, the warming rates for all 4 periods are similar and not statistically significantly different from each other.

Here are the trends and significances for each period:

Period Length Trend
(Degrees C per decade) Significance
1860-1880 21 0.163 Yes
1910-1940 31 0.15 Yes
1975-1998 24 0.166 Yes
1975-2009 35 0.161 Yes

B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming

Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.

C - Do you agree that from January 2002 to the present there has been statistically significant global cooling?

No. This period is even shorter than 1995-2009. The trend this time is negative (-0.12C per decade), but this trend is not statistically significant.

D - Do you agree that natural influences could have contributed significantly to the global warming observed from 1975-1998, and, if so, please could you specify each natural influence and express its radiative forcing over the period in Watts per square metre.

This area is slightly outside my area of expertise. When considering changes over this period we need to consider all possible factors (so human and natural influences as well as natural internal variability of the climate system). Natural influences (from volcanoes and the Sun) over this period could have contributed to the change over this period. Volcanic influences from the two large eruptions (El Chichon in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991) would exert a negative influence. Solar influence was about flat over this period. Combining only these two natural influences, therefore, we might have expected some cooling over this period.

E - How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible?

I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity.

F - Sceptics of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) suggest that the official surface record paints a different story from the actual station records. To restore trust, should we start again with new quality control on input data in total transparency?

First, I am assuming again that you are referring to the surface record from both land and marine regions of the world, although in this answer as you specifically say "station" records, I will emphasise the land regions.

There is more than one "official" surface temperature record, based on actual land station records. There is the one we have developed in CRU, but there are also the series developed at NCDC and GISS. Although we all use very similar station datasets, we each employ different ways of assessing the quality of the individual series and different ways of developing gridded products. The GISS data and their program are freely available for people to experiment with. The agreement between the three series is very good.

Given the web-based availability of the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN), which is used by both NCDC and GISS, anyone else can develop their own global temperature record from land stations.

Through the Met Office we have released (as of 29 January 2010) 80% of the station data that enters the CRU analysis (CRUTEM3).

The graphic in the link below shows that the global land temperature series from these 80% of stations (red line) replicates the analysis based on all 100% of stations (black line).

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/science/monitoring/data-graphic.GIF

The locations of the 80% of stations are shown on the next link in red. The stations we have yet to get agreement to release are shown in grey.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/science/monitoring/locations.GIF

I accept that some have had their trust in science shaken and this needs the Met Office to release more of the data beyond the 80% released so far. Before all the furore broke we had begun discussions with the Met Office for an updated set of station temperatures. With any new station dataset we will make sure we will be able to release all the station temperature data and give source details for all the series.

G - There is a debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was global or not. If it were to be conclusively shown that it was a global phenomenon, would you accept that this would undermine the premise that mean surface atmospheric temperatures during the latter part of the 20th Century were unprecedented?

There is much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America, the North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia. For it to be global in extent the MWP would need to be seen clearly in more records from the tropical regions and the Southern Hemisphere. There are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.

Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or warmer than today (based on an equivalent coverage over the NH and SH) then obviously the late-20th century warmth would not be unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less warm that today, then current warmth would be unprecedented.

We know from the instrumental temperature record that the two hemispheres do not always follow one another. We cannot, therefore, make the assumption that temperatures in the global average will be similar to those in the northern hemisphere.

H - If you agree that there were similar periods of warming since 1850 to the current period, and that the MWP is under debate, what factors convince you that recent warming has been largely man-made?

The fact that we can't explain the warming from the 1950s by solar and volcanic forcing - see my answer to your question D.

I - Would it be reasonable looking at the same scientific evidence to take the view that recent warming is not predominantly manmade?

No - see again my answer to D.

J - Are there lessons to be learned for society or scientists about the way we see uncertainty and risk?

Yes - as stated by Sir John Beddington - the government chief scientist. And this doesn't just apply to climate science.

K - How much faith do you have - and should we have - in the Yamal tree ring data from Siberia? Should we trust the science behind the palaeoclimate record?

First, we would all accept that palaeoclimatic data are considerably less certain than the instrumental data. However, we must use what data are available in order to look at the last 1,000 years.

I believe that our current interpretation of the Yamal tree-ring data in Siberia is sound. Yamal is just one series that enters some of the millennial long reconstructions that are available.

My colleague Keith Briffa has responded to suggestions that there is something amiss with the Yamal tree-ring data. Here is his response:

Examining the validity of the published RCS Yamal tree-ring chronology (http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/yamal2009/)

L - Can you confirm that the IPCC rules were changed so lead authors could add references to any scientific paper which did not meet the 16 December 2005 deadline but was in press on 24 July 2006, so long as it was published in 2006? If this is the case, who made the decision and why?

This is a question for the IPCC.

M - What advice did you seek in handling FOI requests?

The university's policy and guidelines on FOI and the Environmental Information Regulations are on our website and the information policy and compliance manager (IPCM) takes responsibility for co-ordinating responses to requests within that framework. We also have colleagues in each unit and faculty who are trained in FOI to help in gathering information and assessing any possible exceptions or exemptions.

I worked with those colleagues and the IPCM to handle the requests with responses going from the IPCM. He also liaises with the Information Commissioner's Office where necessary and did so on several occasions in relation to requests made to CRU. Where appropriate he also consulted with other colleagues in the university on specific issues.

N - When scientists say "the debate on climate change is over", what exactly do they mean - and what don't they mean?

It would be supposition on my behalf to know whether all scientists who say the debate is over are saying that for the same reason. I don't believe the vast majority of climate scientists think this. This is not my view. There is still much that needs to be undertaken to reduce uncertainties, not just for the future, but for the instrumental (and especially the palaeoclimatic) past as well.

O - Can you tell us about your working life over the past decades in climate science. Paint a picture about the debate with your allies and scientific rivals etc.

I have been at CRU since November 1976. Up until 1994, my working life was almost totally in research. Since 1994, I have become more involved in teaching and student supervision both at the postgraduate and undergraduate level. I became a Professor in 1998 and the director of the Climatic Research Unit in 2004 (I was joint director from 1998).

I am most well known for being involved in the publication of a series of papers (from 1982 to 2006) that have developed a gridded dataset of land-based temperature records. These are only a part of the work I do, as I have been involved in about 270 peer-reviewed publications on many different aspects of climate research.

Over the years at scientific meetings, I've met many people and had numerous discussions with them. I work with a number of different groups of people on different subjects, and some of these groups come together to undertake collaborative pieces of work. We have lively debates about the work we're doing together.

P - The "Climategate" stolen emails were published in November. How has your life been since then?

My life has been awful since that time, but I have discussed this once (in the Sunday Times) and have no wish to go over it again. I am trying to continue my research and supervise the CRU staff and students who I am responsible for.

Q - Let's talk about the e-mails now: In the e-mails you refer to a "trick" which your critics say suggests you conspired to trick the public? You also mentioned "hiding the decline" (in temperatures). Why did you say these things?

This remark has nothing to do with any "decline" in observed instrumental temperatures. The remark referred to a well-known observation, in a particular set of tree-ring data, that I had used in a figure to represent large-scale summer temperature changes over the last 600 years.

The phrase 'hide the decline' was shorthand for providing a composite representation of long-term temperature changes made up of recent instrumental data and earlier tree-ring based evidence, where it was absolutely necessary to remove the incorrect impression given by the tree rings that temperatures between about 1960 and 1999 (when the email was written) were not rising, as our instrumental data clearly showed they were.

This "divergence" is well known in the tree-ring literature and "trick" did not refer to any intention to deceive - but rather "a convenient way of achieving something", in this case joining the earlier valid part of the tree-ring record with the recent, more reliable instrumental record.

I was justified in curtailing the tree-ring reconstruction in the mid-20th Century because these particular data were not valid after that time - an issue which was later directly discussed in the 2007 IPCC AR4 Report.

The misinterpretation of the remark stems from its being quoted out of context. The 1999 WMO report wanted just the three curves, without the split between the proxy part of the reconstruction and the last few years of instrumental data that brought the series up to the end of 1999. Only one of the three curves was based solely on tree-ring data.

The e-mail was sent to a few colleagues pointing out their data was being used in the WMO Annual Statement in 1999. I was pointing out to them how the lines were physically drawn. This e-mail was not written for a general audience. If it had been I would have explained what I had done in much more detail.

R - Why did you ask a colleague to delete all e-mails relating to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC?

This was an e-mail sent out of frustration at one FOI request that was asking for the e-mail correspondence between the lead authors on chapter six of the Working Group One Report of the IPCC. This is one of the issues which the Independent Review will look at.

S - The e-mails suggest you were trying to subvert the process of peer review and to influence editors in their decisions about which papers to publish. Do you accept that?

I do not accept that I was trying to subvert the peer-review process and unfairly influence editors in their decisions. I undertook all the reviews I made in good faith and sent them back to the editors. In some e-mails I questioned the peer-review process with respect to what I believed were poor papers that had appeared. Isn't this called freedom of speech? On some occasions I joined with others to submit a response to some of these papers. Since the beginning of 2005 I have reviewed 43 papers. I take my reviewing seriously and in 2006 I was given an editor's award from Geophysical Research Letters for conscientious and constructive reviewing.

T - Where do you draw the line on the handling of data? What is at odds with acceptable scientific practice? Do you accept that you crossed the line?

This is a matter for the independent review.

U - Now, on to the fallout from "Climategate", as it has become known. You had a leading role in a part of the IPCC, Working Group I. Do you accept that credibility in the IPCC has been damaged - partly as a result of your actions? Does the IPCC need reform to gain public trust?

Some have said that the credibility in the IPCC has been damaged, partly due to the misleading and selective release of particular e-mails. I wish people would spend as much time reading my scientific papers as they do reading my e-mails. The IPCC does need to reassure people about the quality of its assessments.

V - If you have confidence in your science why didn't you come out fighting like the UK government's drugs adviser David Nutt when he was criticised?

I don't feel this question merits an answer.

W - Finally, a personal question: Do you expect to return as director of the Climatic Research Unit? What is next for you?

This question is not for me to answer.

BBC News - Q&A: Professor Phil Jones (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm)

Fuct Jup

02-16-2010, 08:37 AM

OSLO (Reuters) - The U.N. panel of climate experts overstated how much of the Netherlands is below sea level, according to a preliminary report on Saturday, admitting yet another flaw after a row last month over Himalayan glacier melt.

background note by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said a 2007 report wrongly stated that 55 percent of the country was below sea level since the figure included areas above sea level, prone to flooding along rivers.

The United Nations has said errors in the 2007 report of about 3,000 pages do not affect the core conclusions that human activities, led by burning fossil fuels, are warming the globe.

"The sea level statistic was used for background information only, and the updated information remains consistent with the overall conclusions," the IPCC note dated February 12 said.

Skeptics say errors have exposed sloppiness and over-reliance on "grey literature" outside leading scientific journals. The panel's reports are a main guide for governments seeking to work out costly policies to combat global warming.

The 2007 report included the sentence: "The Netherlands is an example of a country highly susceptible to both sea level rise and river flooding because 55 percent of its territory is below sea level."

"A preliminary analysis suggests that the sentence discussed should end with: 'because 55 percent of the Netherlands is at risk of flooding'," the IPCC note said.

The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, the original source of the incorrect data, said on February 5 that just 26 percent of the country is below sea level and 29 percent susceptible to river flooding.

The IPCC said the error was widespread -- it quoted a report from the Dutch Ministry of Transport saying "about 60 percent" of the country is below sea level, and a European Commission study saying "about half."

The panel expressed regret last month after admitting that the 2007 report exaggerated the pace of melt of the Himalayan glaciers, which feed rivers from China to India in dry seasons, in a sentence that said they could all vanish by 2035.

The 2035 figure did not come from a scientific journal.

U.N. climate panel admits Dutch sea level flaw | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61C1V420100213)

Nickdfresh

02-16-2010, 11:20 AM

How about the BBC? Next your gonna tell me the BBC isn't a credible source. Interesting that the American left leaning media refuses to address this story.

Phil Jones is director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA), which has been at the centre of the row over hacked e-mails.

...

BBC News - Q&A: Professor Phil Jones (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm)

What "story?" The one you misread and intentionally mislabeled like every other "right-leaning" idiot out there?

Incidentally, the University of East Anglia doesn't really reflect the entire climate science community...

Nickdfresh

02-16-2010, 11:21 AM

OSLO (Reuters) ...

U.N. climate panel admits Dutch sea level flaw | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61C1V420100213)

Oh deary me! They made a "mistake." Wow, all climate science must be fake then, right retard?

The 9/11 Commission made s few mistakes too, I guess you think that that was an "inside job," then?

Nickdfresh

02-16-2010, 11:27 AM

It's all a hoax, people.

Just like 9/11, right "foil beanie?"

Now, which SUV am I gonna get?

A short, yellow one?

It has to be big enough to carry both my kayaks.

And thick skull. Actually, SUVs with ULEV or SULEV engines don't really contribute much more than any other vehicle. They just increase our dependence on foreign oil.

Why do you hate America?

Fuct Jup

02-16-2010, 11:40 AM

Oh deary me! They made a "mistake." Wow, all climate science must be fake then, right retard?

Nice try.

"The panel expressed regret last month after admitting that the 2007 report exaggerated the pace of melt of the Himalayan glaciers"

An exaggeration is not a mistake, retard (back at ya) :umm: .

Love the name calling from our Mods elite. Perhaps a direct reflection of their childlike mentality of the world?

Fuct Jup

02-16-2010, 11:50 AM

Incidentally, the University of East Anglia doesn't really reflect the entire climate science community...

The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the world and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster efforts by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Nickdfresh

02-16-2010, 11:53 AM

The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the world and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster efforts by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

It's only ONE of numerous sources, and far from the whole research effort of global climate change rests on their research...

And even the emails that were illegally hacked show that their "lies" were more about having to debate Global Warming/Climate Change sophistical as a public one rather than a scientific one...

Nickdfresh

02-16-2010, 11:59 AM

Nice try.

"The panel expressed regret last month after admitting that the 2007 report exaggerated the pace of melt of the Himalayan glaciers"

Yeah, they're not quite melting as fast as we thought. Right, so Global Warming is slower than anticipated which is good news. It also means that regional weather patterns such as El Nino, La Nina, or below average precipitation can temporarily alter climates and provide a minor respite

An exaggeration is not a mistake, retard (back at ya) :umm: .

Um, and unintentional exaggeration is EXACTLY a mistake. Double retard coming your way...

Love the name calling from our Mods elite. Perhaps a direct reflection of their childlike mentality of the world?

Right, just like I love the fact that you have nothing to offer other than mindless, repetitive cut and pastes amounting to spam. Some of which are so fucking absurd and misleading--you've been shown to unselfconsciously own yourself on numerous occasions...

Fuct Jup

02-16-2010, 12:04 PM

Right, just like I love the fact that you have nothing to offer other than mindless, repetitive cut and pastes amounting to spam. Some of which are so fucking absurd and misleading...

Like this one Cumloverdfresh? :barf:

Lake Erie Frozen over; First Time in 14 Years
Following a cold snap in the Northeast, Lake Erie's surface is virtually frozen over for the first time in about 14 years.

The ice ranges in thickness between paper thin along the northern shore and several inches along the southern shore, where many people are ice skating.

GoErie.com reports that the lake hasn't completely frozen since the winter of 1995-1996.

Although the ice cover is considered complete, prevailing winds have created some cracks in the ice.

There are also reportedly ice chunks floating off the coast of Dunkirk, N.Y., which is one of the deepest parts of the lake and would naturally be one of the last places to freeze.

Lake Erie, with an average depth of 62 feet, is the most shallow of the five Great Lakes, which is why it is the only one that completely freezes over.

Since lake-effect snow depends on warmer lake temperatures compared to the air, the frozen lake will deter large amounts of snowfall to the lee of the lake.

The current cold snap will keep the lake mostly, if not completely, frozen for at least the rest of the month.

Story by AccuWeather.com's Gina Cherundolo

http://www.accuweather.com/news-story.asp?partner=accuweather&traveler=0&article=2

Fuct Jup

02-16-2010, 12:07 PM

Yeah, they're not quite melting as fast as we thought.

Oh, so you are a discredited scientist too? Fucking Obama loving, dick sucking, no nothing DLR fansite Mod. HA! :biggrin:

Fuct Jup

02-16-2010, 12:10 PM

Right, just like I love the fact that you have nothing to offer other than mindless, repetitive cut and pastes amounting to spam. Some of which are so fucking absurd and misleading--you've been shown to unselfconsciously own yourself on numerous occasions...

Is this one absurd too Ballsacgobbler? Cause you know the Wall Street Journal is so misleading.

The Continuing Climate Meltdown
More embarrassments for the U.N. and 'settled' science

It has been a bad—make that dreadful—few weeks for what used to be called the "settled science" of global warming, and especially for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that is supposed to be its gold standard.

First it turns out that the Himalayan glaciers are not going to melt anytime soon, notwithstanding dire U.N. predictions. Next came news that an IPCC claim that global warming could destroy 40% of the Amazon was based on a report by an environmental pressure group. Other IPCC sources of scholarly note have included a mountaineering magazine and a student paper.

Since the climategate email story broke in November, the standard defense is that while the scandal may have revealed some all-too-human behavior by a handful of leading climatologists, it made no difference to the underlying science. We think the science is still disputable. But there's no doubt that climategate has spurred at least some reporters to scrutinize the IPCC's headline-grabbing claims in a way they had rarely done previously.

Take the rain forest claim. In its 2007 report, the IPCC wrote that "up to 40% of the Amazonian forests could react drastically to even a slight reduction in precipitation; this means that the tropical vegetation, hydrology and climate system in South America could change very rapidly to another steady state."

But as Jonathan Leake of London's Sunday Times reported last month, those claims were based on a report from the World Wildlife Fund, which in turn had fundamentally misrepresented a study in the journal Nature. The Nature study, Mr. Leake writes, "did not assess rainfall but in fact looked at the impact on the forest of human activity such as logging and burning."

The IPCC has relied on World Wildlife Fund studies regarding the "transformation of natural coastal areas," the "destruction of more mangroves," "glacial lake outbursts causing mudflows and avalanches," changes in the ecosystem of the "Mesoamerican reef," and so on. The Wildlife Fund is a green lobby that believes in global warming, and its "research" reflects its advocacy, not the scientific method.

The IPCC has also cited a study by British climatologist Nigel Arnell claiming that global warming could deplete water resources for as many as 4.5 billion people by the year 2085. But as our Anne Jolis reported in our European edition, the IPCC neglected to include Mr. Arnell's corollary finding, which is that global warming could also increase water resources for as many as six billion people.

The IPCC report made aggressive claims that "extreme weather-related events" had led to "rapidly rising costs." Never mind that the link between global warming and storms like Hurricane Katrina remains tenuous at best. More astonishing (or, maybe, not so astonishing) is that the IPCC again based its assertion on a single study that was not peer-reviewed. In fact, nobody can reliably establish a quantifiable connection between global warming and increased disaster-related costs. In Holland, there's even a minor uproar over the report's claim that 55% of the country is below sea level. It's 26%.

Meanwhile, one of the scientists at the center of the climategate fiasco has called into question other issues that the climate lobby has claimed are indisputable. Phil Jones, who stepped down as head of the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit amid the climate email scandal, told the BBC that the world may well have been warmer during medieval times than it is now.

This raises doubts about how much our current warming is man-made as opposed to merely another of the natural climate shifts that have taken place over the centuries. Mr. Jones also told the BBC there has been no "statistically significant" warming over the past 15 years, though he considers this to be temporary.

***
All of this matters because the IPCC has been advertised as the last and definitive word on climate science. Its reports are the basis on which Al Gore, President Obama and others have claimed that climate ruin is inevitable unless the world reorganizes its economies with huge new taxes on carbon. Now we are discovering the U.N. reports are sloppy political documents intended to drive the climate lobby's regulatory agenda.

The lesson of climategate and now the IPCC's shoddy sourcing is that the claims of the global warming lobby need far more rigorous scrutiny.

The Continuing Climate Meltdown - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703630404575053781465774008.html?m od=WSJ_hpp_sections_opinion#articleTabs%3Dcomments )

Nickdfresh

02-16-2010, 12:16 PM

Like this one Cumloverdfresh? :barf:

Lake Erie Frozen over; First Time in 14 Years
Following a cold snap in the Northeast, Lake Erie's surface is virtually frozen over for the first time in about 14 years.
...
Story by AccuWeather.com's Gina Cherundolo

AccuWeather.com - Weather News Headlines - Weather News (http://www.accuweather.com/news-story.asp?partner=accuweather&traveler=0&article=2)

You call this a "cold snap?" The first part of February has been a bit below average, but we're now getting back to seasonal temps. I believe that January was above average aside from a few days of extreme lows which finally caused the freezing. And we've had a relatively mild winter here as the Baltimore-Washington area has received far more snowfall than we have!:biggrin:

Secondly, you'd be proving my points as Lake Erie traditionally has always frozen and tends to freeze sooner than it did this year, which then reduces our snowfall significantly. Incidentally, it's not technically fully frozen over and will in all likelihood begin to open over the next week or so as sun and higher temps hit it..

BTW, WTF is any of this supposed to mean?

Nickdfresh

02-16-2010, 12:18 PM

Oh, so you are a discredited scientist too? Fucking Obama loving, dick sucking, no nothing DLR fansite Mod. HA! :biggrin:

I've never said I was a scientist credited, nor discredited.

And ever since you've gotten off Bush's cock, you're all uppity now!

Go back to the Links, Hagar douche...

Nickdfresh

02-16-2010, 12:40 PM

Is this one absurd too Ballsacgobbler?[/qauote]

I dunno, sperm-huffer. Let's take a look...

Cause you know the Wall Street Journal is so misleading.

Actually, they're considered right wing and "pro-business" whose interests largely fund the anti-Global Climate Change. But yes, they are generally at least somewhat credible and have decent opines sometimes...

The Continuing Climate Meltdown
More embarrassments for the U.N. and 'settled' science

It has been a bad—make that dreadful—few weeks for what used to be called the "settled science" of global warming, and especially for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that is supposed to be its gold standard.

First it turns out that the Himalayan glaciers are not going to melt anytime soon, notwithstanding dire U.N. predictions. Next came news that an IPCC claim that global warming could destroy 40% of the Amazon was based on a report by an environmental pressure group....
The Continuing Climate Meltdown - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703630404575053781465774008.html?m od=WSJ_hpp_sections_opinion#articleTabs%3Dcomments )

The Wall Street Journal has a long history on posting articles questioning Global Warming, and if they like to critique the honesty of the IPCC, then their right wing editorial staff ranging from intellectually conservative writers with an interesting view point to corporate whore mongers engaging in the typical twisting of facts for their own agenda:

Thursday, January 14, 2010
The Wall Street Journal is Bad for Business

One of my favorite blogs over the last year-and-a-half has been the Wall Street Journal's Environmental Capital, (http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/) which covers issues at the intersection of business and the environment: energy prices, sustainable business practies, new technologies, science, politics, etc. While I didn't always agree with the blog's analysis, its even-handedness and objectivity is a breath of fresh air on a publication given to writing outright falsehoods in its editorial page. And as a 24-year-old with long-term career ambitions in the clean energy business, it is a daily must-read, as one of the best sources of sustainable business news and analysis on the internet.

So I was a bit shocked to visit the site today and find myself greeted by a headline announcing its cancellation: So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish.

Now, I know the Wall Street Journal's editorial page is a right-wing pigpen of nonsense, but this seems like this is a bad move for the WSJ from a BUSINESS standpoint - and you'd think that business concerns would ultimately trump ideology.

Granted, Environmental Capital probably doesn't generate a positive ROI in the PRESENT. But as a top source of news for those working in the clean energy and sustainability space, it would seem poised to grow its readership as the clean tech space takes off. Indeed, given that this is the fastest growing sector of the global economy, it seems like particularly strange timing to punt on the issue. Just look at US venture capital funding for clean tech over the last few years:

True, VC funding of clean tech fell by 34% from 2008-09, but TOTAL VC funding fell by a much greater 55%, and the deal volume barely changed. Since 2003, clean tech's share of VC funding has risen from just 3% to 25%.

Looking forward, the evidence is even more compelling that clean technologies will be the next great industry. A Deloitte survey found that clean technologies are the only category in which a majority of VC firms plan to increase their investments across the next three years - nearly twice as many as the next highest category (medical devices and equipment). Only 6% plan to decrease investments:

So it's absolutely flabbergasting that the WSJ is canceling its well-regarded blog on the subject. In doing so, the WSJ is abandoning its opportunity to grow with the clean economy. Moreover, they're virtually ensuring they'll lose their share of readers in the 18-35 demographic, a growing percentage of which will find themselves employed in clean technologies over the coming years.

The only explanation for the WSJ's decision is ideology: the editors concluded that Environmental Capital was a little too friendly to the environment, and decided an ideological purge was necessary. From now on, it's likely that all WSJ publications will toe the party line of "clean energy bad, global warming fake," or risk crackdown and expulsion.

This too seems like bad business. The paper must figure that no matter the politics of its business audience, they will still be captive customers to the country's top source of business news; a right-wing ideology only broadens its appeal beyond the business community by establishing itself as the leading paper for political conservatives. But this is excessively short-term. Young businesspersons are increasingly liberal on issues of science and climate change, and will increasingly distrust a paper that chooses to ignore the facts in favor of ideology.

It's a sad trend for a paper that was once--and still considers itself to be--the paper of repute for people of business. The creep of right-wing orthodoxy seems to be reaching its tentacles into all aspects of the paper's coverage, even supposedly objective sections. How can you trust the paper on business issues and investment advice when it bails on the fastest growing sector of the economy, when its coverage is driven more by ideology than business sense?

The blog's authors don't leave without a parting shot, which I think is further evidence that this was an ideological decision. As Joe Romm points out, the title "So long, and thanks for all the fish" comes from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:

The phrase also carries a profoundly ironic underlying meaning given the context and the subject area of the blog. Wikipedia’s entry on the not-bad film version explains:

The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (Stephen Fry) narrates that the dolphins, the second most-intelligent creatures on Earth, attempted to warn mankind about the planet’s impending destruction, but humans interpreted the dolphins’ communications as tricks. The dolphins left the planet, leaving their final message to humans as “So long, and thanks for all the fish.”

Was this intentional by Johnson? You decide.

And the blog's second-to-final post was entitled, Who's Afraid of a Clean Energy Future? I guess now we know who.

Smart businessmen know it's better to love the future than fear it.

WAG: The Wall Street Journal is Bad for Business (http://akwag.blogspot.com/2010/01/wall-street-journal-is-bad-for-business.html)

FORD

02-16-2010, 12:59 PM

The Wall Street Journal was once a respectable newspaper, despite the right wing leanings of the editorial page. But that was before Murdoch took over. Now it might as well be the NY Post II.

Fuct Jup

02-16-2010, 01:31 PM

I've never said I was a scientist credited, nor discredited.

And ever since you've gotten off Bush's cock, you're all uppity now!

Go back to the Links, Hagar douche...

Don't push your Fag ways on me, I'm not willing to learn the ways of the Douchedfresh. You can have all the cocks.

I never like Hagar, but I heard he needed a new fuck buddy, give him a call. Fucking Mod, get a job. I get it, you are one of those useless out of work Mother Fuckers who love Obama's socialist agenda. Take from the rich (those of us who work) and Give to CumloverDFresh so he doesn't have to work.

Seshmeister

02-16-2010, 03:47 PM

How about the BBC? Next your gonna tell me the BBC isn't a credible source...

I don't think you read it all.

To be honest I'm becoming not that bothered either way. I'm not going to waste too much of my time arguing with people whose environment is far more likely than mine to be fucked by climate change.

I could easily cope with a 10 degree rise here... :)

Fuct Jup

02-16-2010, 04:54 PM

It has been tough to keep up with all the bad news for global warming alarmists. We're on the edge of our chair, waiting for the next shoe to drop. This has been an Imelda Marcos kind of season for shoe-dropping about global warming.

At your next dinner party, here are some of the latest talking points to bring up when someone reminds you that Al Gore and the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change won Nobel prizes for their work on global warming.

ClimateGate – This scandal began the latest round of revelations when thousands of leaked documents from Britain's East Anglia Climate Research Unit showed systematic suppression and discrediting of climate skeptics' views and discarding of temperature data, suggesting a bias for making the case for warming. Why do such a thing if, as global warming defenders contend, the "science is settled?"

FOIGate – The British government has since determined someone at East Anglia committed a crime by refusing to release global warming documents sought in 95 Freedom of Information Act requests. The CRU is one of three international agencies compiling global temperature data. If their stuff's so solid, why the secrecy?

ChinaGate – An investigation by the U.K.'s left-leaning Guardian newspaper found evidence that Chinese weather station measurements not only were seriously flawed, but couldn't be located. "Where exactly are 42 weather monitoring stations in remote parts of rural China?" the paper asked. The paper's investigation also couldn't find corroboration of what Chinese scientists turned over to American scientists, leaving unanswered, "how much of the warming seen in recent decades is due to the local effects of spreading cities, rather than global warming?" The Guardian contends that researchers covered up the missing data for years.

HimalayaGate – An Indian climate official admitted in January that, as lead author of the IPCC's Asian report, he intentionally exaggerated when claiming Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035 in order to prod governments into action. This fraudulent claim was not based on scientific research or peer-reviewed. Instead it was originally advanced by a researcher, since hired by a global warming research organization, who later admitted it was "speculation" lifted from a popular magazine. This political, not scientific, motivation at least got some researcher funded.

PachauriGate – Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman who accepted with Al Gore the Nobel Prize for scaring people witless, at first defended the Himalaya melting scenario. Critics, he said, practiced "voodoo science." After the melting-scam perpetrator 'fessed up, Pachauri admitted to making a mistake. But, he insisted, we still should trust him.

PachauriGate II – Pachauri also claimed he didn't know before the 192-nation climate summit meeting in Copenhagen in December that the bogus Himalayan glacier claim was sheer speculation. But the London Times reported that a prominent science journalist said he had pointed out those errors in several e-mails and discussions to Pachauri, who "decided to overlook it." Stonewalling? Cover up? Pachauri says he was "preoccupied." Well, no sense spoiling the Copenhagen party, where countries like Pachauri's India hoped to wrench billions from countries like the United States to combat global warming's melting glaciers. Now there are calls for Pachauri's resignation.

SternGate – One excuse for imposing worldwide climate crackdown has been the U.K.'s 2006 Stern Report, an economic doomsday prediction commissioned by the government. Now the U.K. Telegraph reports that quietly after publication "some of these predictions had been watered down because the scientific evidence on which they were based could not be verified." Among original claims now deleted were that northwest Australia has had stronger typhoons in recent decades, and that southern Australia lost rainfall because of rising ocean temperatures. Exaggerated claims get headlines. Later, news reporters disclose the truth. Why is that?

SternGate II – A researcher now claims the Stern Report misquoted his work to suggest a firm link between global warming and more-frequent and severe floods and hurricanes. Robert Muir-Wood said his original research showed no such link. He accused Stern of "going far beyond what was an acceptable extrapolation of the evidence." We're shocked.

AmazonGate – The London Times exposed another shocker: the IPCC claim that global warming will wipe out rain forests was fraudulent, yet advanced as "peer-reveiwed" science. The Times said the assertion actually "was based on an unsubstantiated claim by green campaigners who had little scientific expertise," "authored by two green activists" and lifted from a report from the World Wildlife Fund, an environmental pressure group. The "research" was based on a popular science magazine report that didn't bother to assess rainfall. Instead, it looked at the impact of logging and burning. The original report suggested "up to 40 percent" of Brazilian rain forest was extremely sensitive to small reductions in the amount of rainfall, but the IPCC expanded that to cover the entire Amazon, the Times reported.

PeerReviewGate – The U.K. Sunday Telegraph has documented at least 16 nonpeer-reviewed reports (so far) from the advocacy group World Wildlife Fund that were used in the IPCC's climate change bible, which calls for capping manmade greenhouse gases.

RussiaGate – Even when global warming alarmists base claims on scientific measurements, they've often had their finger on the scale. Russian think tank investigators evaluated thousands of documents and e-mails leaked from the East Anglia research center and concluded readings from the coldest regions of their nation had been omitted, driving average temperatures up about half a degree.

Russia-Gate II – Speaking of Russia, a presentation last October to the Geological Society of America showed how tree-ring data from Russia indicated cooling after 1961, but was deceptively truncated and only artfully discussed in IPCC publications. Well, at least the tree-ring data made it into the IPCC report, albeit disguised and misrepresented.

U.S.Gate – If Brits can't be trusted, are Yanks more reliable? The U.S. National Climate Data Center has been manipulating weather data too, say computer expert E. Michael Smith and meteorologist Joesph D'Aleo. Forty years ago there were 6,000 surface-temperature measuring stations, but only 1,500 by 1990, which coincides with what global warming alarmists say was a record temperature increase. Most of the deleted stations were in colder regions, just as in the Russian case, resulting in misleading higher average temperatures.

IceGate – Hardly a continent has escaped global warming skewing. The IPCC based its findings of reductions in mountain ice in the Andes, Alps and in Africa on a feature story of climbers' anecdotes in a popular mountaineering magazine, and a dissertation by a Switzerland university student, quoting mountain guides. Peer-reviewed? Hype? Worse?

ResearchGate – The global warming camp is reeling so much lately it must have seemed like a major victory when a Penn State University inquiry into climate scientist Michael Mann found no misconduct regarding three accusations of climate research impropriety. But the university did find "further investigation is warranted" to determine whether Mann engaged in actions that "seriously deviated from accepted practices for proposing, conducting or reporting research or other scholarly activities." Being investigated for only one fraud is a global warming victory these days.

ReefGate – Let's not forget the alleged link between climate change and coral reef degradation. The IPCC cited not peer-reviewed literature, but advocacy articles by Greenpeace, the publicity-hungry advocacy group, as its sole source for this claim.

AfricaGate – The IPCC claim that rising temperatures could cut in half agricultural yields in African countries turns out to have come from a 2003 paper published by a Canadian environmental think tank – not a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

DutchGate – The IPCC also claimed rising sea levels endanger the 55 percent of the Netherlands it says is below sea level. The portion of the Netherlands below sea level actually is 20 percent. The Dutch environment minister said she will no longer tolerate climate researchers' errors.

AlaskaGate – Geologists for Space Studies in Geophysics and Oceanography and their U.S. and Canadian colleagues say previous studies largely overestimated by 40 percent Alaskan glacier loss for 40 years. This flawed data are fed into those computers to predict future warming.

Fold this column up and lay it next to your napkin the next time you have Al Gore or his ilk to dine. It should make interesting after-dinner conversation.

Contact the writer: mlandsbaum@ocregister.comor 714-796-5025

Print Article: Mark Landsbaum: What to say to a global warming alarmist (http://www.ocregister.com/common/printer/view.php?db=ocregister&id=234092)

Nickdfresh

02-16-2010, 07:32 PM

Don't push your Fag ways on me, I'm not willing to learn the ways of the Douchedfresh. You can have all the cocks.

Wow, just when you couldn't look like more of a fucking retard...

You talk so dirty!

I never like Hagar, but I heard he needed a new fuck buddy, give him a call. Fucking Mod, get a job. I get it, you are one of those useless out of work Mother Fuckers who love Obama's socialist agenda. Take from the rich (those of us who work) and Give to CumloverDFresh so he doesn't have to work.

I can tell how you never "like" Van Hagar by your Links posts, Homopotamus. But you and I both know you've extensively posted there under different user names...

Funny how I'm the one "out of work," yet you're the one posting here steadily throughout the afternoon. But tell us how "rich" you are again, fast food worker...

Fuct Jup

02-17-2010, 08:43 AM

Wow, just when you couldn't look like more of a fucking retard...

You talk so dirty!

I can tell how you never "like" Van Hagar by your Links posts, Homopotamus. But you and I both know you've extensively posted there under different user names...

Funny how I'm the one "out of work," yet you're the one posting here steadily throughout the afternoon. But tell us how "rich" you are again, fast food worker...

What a fool, I post while I'm in the office.

Fuct Jup

02-17-2010, 08:48 AM

ELVIS

02-17-2010, 03:30 PM

You talk so dirty!

Please use the PM function for your homoerotic flirting...

:elvis:

bueno bob

02-17-2010, 04:16 PM

Yea whatever DLR mod. You're not worth my time.

This is "I've been owned but I'm going to elevate myself above it" tactic #8, kids, perfect example. Also known in some circles as the "I can't hear you I can't hear you I can't hear you nah nah nah nah nah nah!!!!" response, an adolescent rebuttal when confronted by superior intellect in debate.

http://powrightbetweentheeyes.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451bd1369e201127943a8ea28a4-800wi

chefcraig

02-17-2010, 04:39 PM

This is "I've been owned but I'm going to elevate myself above it" tactic #8, kids, perfect example. Also known in some circles as the "I can't hear you I can't hear you I can't hear you nah nah nah nah nah nah!!!!" response, an adolescent rebuttal when confronted by superior intellect in debate.

For more information and a glossary of terms, see "Further Variations on the Pee Wee Herman Principle (Tactic #3)" in the appendix located in the rear of this website.

http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/2939/apeeee.jpg (http://img198.imageshack.us/i/apeeee.jpg/)

Nickdfresh

02-17-2010, 04:43 PM

What a fool, I post while I'm in the office.

Sorry we take time away from your curing of cancer. But think of the children and just say "NO!" to that copy of OU812 I know you want to put in...

Nickdfresh

02-17-2010, 04:44 PM

Please use the PM function for your homoerotic flirting...

:elvis:

Does it work for you?

Susie Q

02-17-2010, 05:00 PM

Well....someone will be laughing or completely horrified when or if nothing happens, or does. How's that for a statement? ;)

Not following too much on the science end or religious end of the spectrum here, but....I just feel we will definitely be going through a climatic change a bit more than these "subtle" changes that we have experienced in the last few months. I believe that our climates in the US will flip. The northern states on the east coast will be much more warmer, the winter season will be less and less. WE will be the ones growing oranges soon enough. While the south will experience more colder weather and see more and more snow.

There was some program that I watched that said with the plates shifting under the sea bed we may see the state of California go right under water or break off and become an island. It also said that the rising sea level will also take out NYC and the 'beach front will be a hundred miles inland.

I think this is a good possibility of this happening and we will end up NOT cataclysmic or anything, but a definite eye opener. People will think differently in the next 10 years or so.

ELVIS

02-17-2010, 05:13 PM

Well....someone will be laughing or completely horrified when or if nothing happens, or does. How's that for a statement? ;)

The climate nazis will because they include every possible atmospheric condition in their doomsday agenda...

Not following too much on the science end or religious end of the spectrum here, but....I just feel we will definitely be going through a climatic change a bit more than these "subtle" changes that we have experienced in the last few months.

You "feel" it ?? Is that akin to how Oprah felt the Saints would win the Super Bowl ??

C'mon Sue...

:elvis: