Must Read: Daily Mail Digests ClimateGate

And not just digests; there is little question about whose side they're on here.

And this may be completely unfair, but when they suggest the science is far from settled, I can't help but hear them saying "The science is far from settled, boy."

I would quote this but the real meat of it is, like, the entire first two thirds of the article, and I'm having trouble seeing how I can "excerpt" this properly within the bounds of fair use.

How about I just say read the whole thing?

Here's a lengthy excerpt, but my real suggestion is just to read the thing, and take a gander at the charts, where the Warmists attempted to quite literally "hide the decline" by covering/masking the tree-ring data showing plunging temperatures with other trend lines, so you simply could not see the tree-ring line, and they could claim, "Oh dear, oh dear, of course that green line was included, but darnitall, it just seems to have been printed behind some other lines. Sorry."

It is true that, in Watsons phrase, in the autumn of 1999 Jones and his colleagues were trying to tweak a diagram. But it wasnt just any old diagram.

It was the chart displayed on the first page of the Summary for Policymakers of the 2001 IPCC report - the famous hockey stick graph that has been endlessly reproduced in everything from newspapers to primary-school textbooks ever since, showing centuries of level or declining temperatures until a dizzying, almost vertical rise in the late 20th Century.

There could be no simpler or more dramatic representation of global warming, and if the origin of worldwide concern over climate change could be traced to a single image, it would be the hockey stick.

Drawing a diagram such as this is far from straightforward.

Gabriel Fahrenheit did not invent the mercury thermometer until 1724, so scientists who want to reconstruct earlier climate history have to use proxy data - measurements derived from records such as ice cores, tree-rings and growing season dates.

However, different proxies give very different results.

For example, some suggest that the medieval warm period, the 350-year era that started around 1000, when red wine grapes flourished in southern England and the Vikings tilled now-frozen farms in Greenland, was considerably warmer than even 1998.

Of course, this is inconvenient to climate change believers because there were no cars or factories pumping out greenhouse gases in 1000AD - yet the Earth still warmed.

Some tree-ring data eliminates the medieval warmth altogether, while others reflect it. In September 1999, Joness IPCC colleague Michael Mann of Penn State University in America - who is now also the subject of an official investigation --was working with Jones on the hockey stick. As they debated which data to use, they discussed a long tree-ring analysis carried out by Keith Briffa.

Briffa knew exactly why they wanted it, writing in an email on September 22: I know there is pressure to present a nice tidy story as regards apparent unprecedented warming in a thousand years or more. But his conscience was troubled. In reality the situation is not quite so simple - I believe that the recent warmth was probably matched about 1,000 years ago.


Another British scientist - Chris Folland of the Met Offices Hadley Centre - wrote the same day that using Briffas data might be awkward, because it suggested the past was too warm. This, he lamented, dilutes the message rather significantly.

Over the next few days, Briffa, Jones, Folland and Mann emailed each other furiously. Mann was fearful that if Briffas trees made the IPCC diagram, the sceptics [would] have a field day casting doubt on our ability to understand the factors that influence these estimates and, thus, can undermine faith [in them] - I dont think that doubt is scientifically justified, and Id hate to be the one to have to give it fodder!

Finally, Briffa changed the way he computed his data and submitted a revised version. This brought his work into line for earlier centuries, and cooled them significantly. But alas, it created another, potentially even more serious, problem.

According to his tree rings, the period since 1960 had not seen a steep rise in temperature, as actual temperature readings showed - but a large and steady decline, so calling into question the accuracy of the earlier data derived from tree rings.

This is the context in which, seven

weeks later, Jones presented his trick - as simple as it was deceptive.

All he had to do was cut off Briffas inconvenient data at the point where the decline started, in 1961, and replace it with actual temperature readings, which showed an increase.

On the hockey stick graph, his line is abruptly terminated - but the end of the line is obscured by the other lines.

Any scientist ought to know that you just cant mix and match proxy and actual data, said Philip Stott, emeritus professor of biogeography at Londons School of Oriental and African Studies.

Theyre apples and oranges. Yet thats exactly what he did.

Since Warmergate-broke, some of the CRUs supporters have claimed that Jones and his colleagues made a full disclosure of what they did to Briffas data in order to produce the hockey stick.

But as McIntyre points out, contrary to claims by various climate scientists, the IPCC Third Assessment Report did not disclose the deletion of the post-1960 values.

On the final diagram, the cut off was simply concealed by the other lines.

By 2007, when the IPCC produced its fourth report, McIntyre had become aware of the manipulation of the Briffa data and Briffa himself, as shown at the start of this article, continued to have serious qualms.

McIntyre by now was an IPCC reviewer and he urged the IPCC not to delete the post-1961 data in its 2007 graph. They refused, he said, stating this would be inappropriate.

I guessed at that point earlier -- that the "hide the decline" problem came in the first instance from attempting to reduce the importance of certain proxies proving a Medieval Warm Period, and when that "adjustment" was made, it made the current era (the last fifty years around) completely screwey as regards predicted (retroactively) temperatures.

I had that sense because I know a poll analyst who always runs into this problem -- play wack-a-mole with one screwed-up demographic that's giving you fits and you create two other problems -- and that person isn't even deliberately trying to fudge results or get to a pre-determined conclusions.

So, yes, you can get rid of this troublesome Medieval Warm Period, but only by imposing an algorithm that causes tree-rings to completely go 180 degrees in the opposite direction from observed modern temperature readings.

Injecting one falsehood into the alleged models causes another that cannot be eliminated from the models, but only hidden by simply snipping that portion of the modeling out altogether.

By the way, the supposed headline here is that the Russians admit the HARRY_READ_ME file did originate on one of their servers, but that they didn't leak it; that doesn't seem like real news to me. It's just a confirmation of something we already knew and a denial of something we're speculating about. Neither seems particularly remarkable.


McIntyre... wrote a blog-post that it seems much of this Daily Mail article is based on. So maybe read that too, or instead of.


Via Jim "The Preacher" Treacher.

Argument: Regarding Darwin Station's suspiciously-high homogenization adjustments: The Economist posted this dismissal, which at first sounds persuasive, until you read this rejoinder.


Disappearing Story: In case you thought you just saw a story appear and then vanish --

Sorry, I pulled this story. I was still drafting it -- it was something I was doodling around with it -- and accidentally posted it.

And in fact, posted it as I was trying to rewrite it and and figure out how to address a big fat error I had made, which invalidated the central point I was making. As it was a pure misfire, and it was up for literally one second, I'm gonna go ahead and keep it hidden. FWIW: I screwed up, read a chart completely wrong, went off on it, criticizing the Economist for reading the chart wrong while I was. I was trying to find a different error I could pin on them when I accidentally posted.

Posted by: Ace at 03:26 PM



Comments

1
The British Press. Once again doing the jobs that the American press refuse to do.

Posted by: Blazer at December 13, 2009 03:28 PM (+FzLa)

2 They Lie!

Posted by: toby928 at December 13, 2009 03:36 PM (PD1tk)

3 The Daily Mail is a right wing newspaper, it's like getting your info from the Washington Times or National Review or Fox news. FAIL!

Posted by: chester at December 13, 2009 03:40 PM (W1bK/)

4 McIntyre demonstrated the same thing in a post on Thursday.

Posted by: Steve L. at December 13, 2009 03:41 PM (mIIVr)

5 How can anybody even mention the phrase 'climate change' and not be laughed out of the room. For Obama to even attend this nonsense is worse than his appearance at the Olympic Fest. Is it true that it was the Russians who leaked this mess? If so what was that all about?

Posted by: red131 at December 13, 2009 03:43 PM (X8ufu)

6 thanks Steve L.

Posted by: ace at December 13, 2009 03:43 PM (jlvw3)

7 1 / Blazer: Agreed, maybe it's because the Brits have had the left in power and the marxist boot on their necks longer than we have.

... oh, almost forgot, yeah, I still want to launch Algore from a clown-cannon.

Posted by: Huckleberry at December 13, 2009 03:43 PM (F71c5)

8 Two terms now in the leftist buzz-word lexicon that make me want to strangle the user are Climate Justice and Carbon Pollution.

Posted by: the real joe at December 13, 2009 03:45 PM (SUYSs)

9 Yeah, that sucked. I didn't get a bailout, either.

Posted by: Guy that owned vineyard in England in 1350 at December 13, 2009 03:47 PM (P33XN)

10 Chester, if listening/watching/reading Fox, the Washington Times, or the National Review is so bad, why is it that the "typical" consumer of those products are MORE informed and MORE knowledgeable of world events, politics, etc. than those consumers of CNN and the NY Times?

People that only get there news from the NY Times are the ones missing half the story.

Posted by: Doug H at December 13, 2009 03:50 PM (F/ZbE)

11 Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. Yeah, Chester, it's simple. It does, however have the virtue of being correct. OTOH, you are nuanced, and yet, full of crap.

Posted by: pep at December 13, 2009 03:54 PM (DZyVK)

12 Freezing my ass here in NY. I think we could do with a revisit of the MWP. Turn it into the modern warming period.

Not going to be warm for months now....

Posted by: meep at December 13, 2009 03:56 PM (Jw4eT)

13

I get my news from the bastion of integrity in journalism himself, Keith Olberman, so I know I'm right you yankee dog wingers !

Posted by: chester the molester at December 13, 2009 03:56 PM (+FzLa)

14
Reminds me of:

When the law is against you, argue the facts. When the facts are against you, argue the law. ...

Or just make up the facts and skew the data.

The ClimateSwindlers List of transgressions grows daily.

Posted by: I Am Jack's AGW Denial at December 13, 2009 03:59 PM (IhHdM)

15 I'm trying to recreate the MWP here in my bedroom. Alas, to no avail. Maybe I need more (or less) tree rings?

Posted by: Algore ithm at December 13, 2009 04:03 PM (ympAm)

16
what happened to the Economist post?

Posted by: the professor at December 13, 2009 04:12 PM (PaMcq)

17 Hey, Ace keeps the most transparent blog EVAH!

Posted by: nickless at December 13, 2009 04:12 PM (MMC8r)

18
nevermind

Posted by: the professor at December 13, 2009 04:13 PM (PaMcq)

19 By comparing Chester's #3 and #13, I do believe he pulleth our legs and forgot the /sarc tag that is somethimes necessay because the sarc is sometimes lame.

Posted by: Pelayo at December 13, 2009 04:14 PM (8NGHm)

20 "figure out how to address a big fat error I had made, which invalidated the central point I was making."
Might I be of some assistance?

Posted by: Mike's Nature Trick at December 13, 2009 04:14 PM (uEQbr)

21 >>>what happened to the Economist post?


I screwed up. I had never meant to post it. It was unfinished, and the thing that I was working on was *rescuing* it, as I had goofed badly in looking at the charts (and then scolding The Economist for not looking at the charts).

I am still trying to figure out if the post can be rescued or if it's just a total complete screw-up.

Posted by: ace at December 13, 2009 04:15 PM (jlvw3)

22 I was sitting here trying to figure out if I could make some changes to it and then screwed up and posted.

Posted by: ace at December 13, 2009 04:15 PM (jlvw3)

23 I'm in upstate SC freezin' my boys off! Where the hell is MY global warming?
39 for a high yesterday, 46 today. Ok, I realize I live south of North Pole Mn, but it's still cold!!

Posted by: Joseph Brown at December 13, 2009 04:17 PM (TbE/S)

24
Remember when Katie Couric (who's mouth looks like Senor Wences) said she reads The Economist?

She said after someone asked her about asking Sarah Palin what Palin reads. Katie must think it makes her seem smart if tells people she reads The Economist. Or, at least smarter than Mrs Palin.

Posted by: the professor at December 13, 2009 04:17 PM (PaMcq)

25 Gotta love it --again the tabloids are lapping the lamestream broadsheets on this.

Posted by: logprof at December 13, 2009 04:18 PM (I3Udb)

26 The media is basically saying 'Don't read us."

Posted by: ace at December 13, 2009 04:20 PM (jlvw3)

27 O/T It's here! It's here! The shinebox is here!
http://tinyurl.com/yd7ofd9

Posted by: RushBabe at December 13, 2009 04:21 PM (LKkE8)

28 Maybe little Katey reads the Cconomist, that don't mean she understands it.

Posted by: Joseph Brown at December 13, 2009 04:22 PM (TbE/S)

29 The title for these posts should be Things you'll never see on TV .

Posted by: Bill D. Cat at December 13, 2009 04:23 PM (vKdhq)

30 28 Crap, typing finger faster than brain, again

Posted by: Joseph Brown at December 13, 2009 04:23 PM (TbE/S)

31 Don't read us.

Posted by: The Media at December 13, 2009 04:23 PM (H6Jyg)

32 Don't watch us on TV, either.

Posted by: The Media at December 13, 2009 04:24 PM (H6Jyg)

33
Isn't it strange that the newspapers-going-bankrupt stories have been awful quiet for the last few months?

How is the print media hanging on?

Posted by: the professor at December 13, 2009 04:24 PM (PaMcq)

34 The media is basically saying 'Don't read us."
For years, I've been hearing them say "Don't read us, girl."

Posted by: Mama AJ at December 13, 2009 04:25 PM (Be4xl)

35 Sort of related - A post at theblogmocracy.com
http://tinyurl.com/yduyaxr

song_and_dance_man
112 | December 12, 2009 7:16 pm
Speranza wrote:
I dont know about that but I read that she took him for just about everything he owned.
If you caught the interview of Foster last night on Colmes radio show he admitted all hes got is his blog. Its no wonder he begs for money there.
Well, well.

Posted by: Wm T Sherman at December 13, 2009 04:26 PM (tm15w)

36

For those who missed it:

Charles Johnson/Little Green Footballs Calendar Infomercial

Posted by: Tinian at December 13, 2009 04:30 PM (7+pP9)

37 Tinian, you would normally owe me a new keyboard, but that was so funny, I'm gonna let you off the hook.

Posted by: Peaches at December 13, 2009 04:35 PM (9Wv2j)

38 I pointed out most of what was in that article after reading the e-mails. But this is just the surface. This is AFTER they adjust and manipulate the data in a fashion totally disconnected from reality. They STILL have to combine apples with oranges on their chart to get the hockey stick. Look at the charts from Nashville and New Zealand that have recently been published on the web and see what they did to them. I LIVE in Tennessee and it sure as hell hasn't gotten warmer like their charts show.

BTW Ace, this isn't a model they are talking about. It is supposedly just a chart of the temperature. They want to show it rising so that if you extrapolate and continue drawing the line it goes ever higher at a steep angle. That would make the data match their model... they have it ass backwards. They are manipulating the data to match their models instead of vice versa.

I have yet to find a single part of what these guys do that is the least bit legitimate. Basically they can't even tell you what the temperature was a few centuries ago with any certainty and they can't tell you what it is now because they have destroyed the data. They have subtracted from the sum total of climate knowledge we would have otherwise had at this point.

I knew it was bad but not this bad.

Posted by: Voluble at December 13, 2009 04:36 PM (nZNTl)

39
haha, Tinian, good link!


Posted by: the professor at December 13, 2009 04:37 PM (PaMcq)

40 We've got these bastards on the run now. This climate-gate scandal is to the scaremongers what a terribly embarrassing event that can never be lived down is to a school child. It's something that will always be remembered, like that kid who pooped his pants in sixth grade or that girl who tripped and fell during eighth grade graduation--this is the reputation they are stuck with from now on.
This year was their big chance--with the Dems in control of everything, the stars were aligned--and they got nothing through Congress. They are looking likely to lose a great deal of their majorities in Congress in 2010, possibly giving up House and much of the Senate, and the opportunity will be passed. By the time such an opportunity rolls around again, how many more years will have passed in which the long-prophesied apocalypse never materialized? In ten, twenty years, when the temperatures are exactly the same, if not cooler, this whole sorry episode will be over, and they will have nothing for all their efforts to cause a panic.

Posted by: Shooter McGavin at December 13, 2009 04:42 PM (cxGtL)

41 Essentially, the 'hockey stick' is two charts pasted together.

That's the kind of thing that goes on in science all the time, of course.

Posted by: nickless at December 13, 2009 04:42 PM (MMC8r)

42 "Essentially, the 'hockey stick' is two charts pasted together."

After stretching and tilting both of them.

Posted by: Al at December 13, 2009 04:46 PM (0lyUI)

43
You know what would be great? A Global Warming Hoax for Dummies post.

I know it's been simplified, but it hasn't been simplified enough for the layman. We need the Hoax summed up in one paragraph and a few bullet points showing facts.

For instance:

-- the hoaxters claim the ice caps are melting, but fact is the ice is...
-- the hoaxsters claim the temp is rising, but the temp is...
-- polar bears are dying off, but in reality...


Posted by: the professor at December 13, 2009 04:53 PM (PaMcq)

44 Anybody know why the EPA finds it's time to arm itself with Glocks?
http://tinyurl.com/ybdwpze

Posted by: drillanwr at December 13, 2009 04:54 PM (1kwr2)

45
Also, if we could compile all of the eco-kook's dire warnings for the last 30 years and put them side-by-side to the current conditions it would help people put this phony-baloney alarmism into perspective.

Rush Limbaugh called these people terrorists and he's right. They've been trying to scare the shit out of people for political purposes for decades.

Posted by: the professor at December 13, 2009 04:58 PM (XaQVn)

46 -- the hoaxters claim the ice caps are melting, but fact is the ice is... less dense than water-- the hoaxsters claim the temp is rising, but the temp is... a good worker and we should hure more temps.-- polar bears are dying off, but in reality... they are learning how to live in Texas
QED

Posted by: Pelayo at December 13, 2009 04:58 PM (8NGHm)

47
Is the rain forest really disappearing?

Is deforestation a real problem?


Posted by: the professor at December 13, 2009 05:00 PM (XaQVn)

48 There was a copy of The economist on the table at the dentist's office last week and I remember the Morons mentioning so I picked it up and read it.

It is a POS liberal rag that should be renamed The Commiecrat Propagandist. I swear, the entire magazine publishing industry has been taken over by the communists.

Posted by: Vic at December 13, 2009 05:00 PM (CDUiN)

49 Lord Monckton politelyeducates a Greenpeace scandi.
http://tinyurl.com/yeu23ma

Posted by: huerfano at December 13, 2009 05:01 PM (BEYNH)

50 You know, if we could convince the media that global warming was a right wing scam to give them less taxes, maybe they'd actually report on it.

Posted by: Iblis at December 13, 2009 05:02 PM (9221z)

51 Shooter McGavin: "In ten, twenty years, when the temperatures are
exactly the same, if not cooler, this whole sorry episode will be over,
and they will have nothing for all their efforts to cause a panic."

Did someone say global cooling? How about global stability? That's it! Global stability. Stability means the status quo, and who likes status quo? Deniers, that's who.

It's urgent that we transfer vast monies and change world economies to thwart all the social and economic injustice of global stability.

Posted by: Third Bite at the Apple at December 13, 2009 05:03 PM (50S+L)

52
Posted by: Third Bite at the Apple at December 13, 2009 05:03 PM (50S+L)



We're not denying climate change exists, we're just saying its not man made. The Vikings didn't call it Greenland because it was covered with ice when they drove their suv's there.

Posted by: Blazer at December 13, 2009 05:06 PM (+FzLa)

53 Our faith is strong. The science of global warming is settled. Only heretics anti-vaccination racist creationists think otherwise.

Posted by: Chas. Johnson-Kilgore-Sharmuta, Esq. at December 13, 2009 05:08 PM (uHvsp)

54
Lord Monckton politelyeducates a Greenpeace scandi.
http://tinyurl.com/yeu23ma

Posted by: huerfano

Thanks for linking that! He sums it up perfectly.

I wish he would've let her talk about Katrina more; I think that would've been interesting.

Posted by: the professor at December 13, 2009 05:12 PM (XaQVn)

55 Blazer@53,

My sock's name is Spartacus Third Bite at the Apple.

I believe that should give you appropriate context.

Posted by: Third Bite at the Apple at December 13, 2009 05:14 PM (50S+L)

56 Crap. Let me take a second bite at the apple here.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 13, 2009 05:15 PM (50S+L)

57 Isn't it strange that the newspapers-going-bankrupt stories have been awful quiet for the last few months?Editor Publisher died just a couple of weeks ago. Piss on its grave.

Posted by: andycanuck at December 13, 2009 05:19 PM (2qU2d)

58 I can't stand people who say to me, "You don't believe in Climate Change?"
To them I say that unicorns cause aging. When they said it doesn't, I ask them, "You don't believe in aging?" To which they say, "Yes, of course I believe in aging, but you don't have any proof that unicorns cause it." And I respond, "I do have the evidence, but you can't see it because you will do nothing but try and disprove it therefore I cannot show it to you. If I were to show it to anyone, it would only be to other scientists whose livelihood depends on Unicorn/Aging Grant money and peer review journals who also depend on that grant money."
I think this helps them understand that yes I do believe the climate changes, but I have doubts that 200 hundred years of industrial revolution can make that much of an impact on an entity that is 4.5 billion years old
I think Michael Crichton did a great summation:
"You think man can destroy the planet? What intoxicating vanity. Let me tell you about our planet. Earth is four-and-a-half-billion-years-old. There's been life on it for nearly that long, 3.8 billion years. Bacteria first; later the first multicellular life, then the first complex creatures in the sea, on the land. Then finally the great sweeping ages of animals, the amphibians, the dinosaurs, at last the mammals, each one enduring millions on millions of years, great dynasties of creatures rising, flourishing, dying away -- all this against a background of continuous and violent upheaval. Mountain ranges thrust up, eroded away, cometary impacts, volcano eruptions, oceans rising and falling, whole continents moving, an endless, constant, violent change, colliding, buckling to make mountains over millions of years. Earth has survived everything in its time. It will certainly survive us. If all the nuclear weapons in the world went off at once and all the plants, all the animals died and the earth was sizzling hot for a hundred thousand years, life would survive, somewhere: under the soil, frozen in Arctic ice. Sooner or later, when the planet was no longer inhospitable, life would spread again. The evolutionary process would begin again. It might take a few billion years for life to regain its present variety. Of course, it would be very different from what it is now, but the earth would survive our folly, only we would not. If the ozone layer gets thinner, ultraviolet radiation sears the earth, so what? Ultraviolet radiation is good for life. It's powerful energy. It promotes mutation, change. Many forms of life will thrive with more UV radiation. Many others will die out. Do you think this is the first time that's happened? Think about oxygen. Necessary for life now, but oxygen is actually a metabolic poison, a corrosive glass, like fluorine. When oxygen was first produced as a waste product by certain plant cells some three billion years ago, it created a crisis for all other life on earth. Those plants were polluting the environment, exhaling a lethal gas. Earth eventually had an atmosphere incompatible with life. Nevertheless, life on earth took care of itself. In the thinking of the human being a hundred years is a long time. A hundred years ago we didn't have cars, airplanes, computers or vaccines. It was a whole different world, but to the earth, a hundred years is nothing. A million years is nothing. This planet lives and breathes on a much vaster scale. We can't imagine its slow and powerful rhythms, and we haven't got the humility to try. We've been residents here for the blink of an eye. If we're gone tomorrow, the earth will not miss us. "

Posted by: Ben at December 13, 2009 05:20 PM (bftbi)

59 Here's Lord Monckton being interviewed by, or mainly giving a speech to, a moderate conservative, Canadiantalk show host, Michael Coren.

Posted by: andycanuck at December 13, 2009 05:25 PM (2qU2d)

60 Isn't it strange that the newspapers-going-bankrupt stories have been awful quiet for the last few months?Editor Publisher died just a couple of weeks ago. Piss on its grave.

I hadn't heard that.

Wow, the buggy whip industry is doing better.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 13, 2009 05:26 PM (ItSLQ)

61 HA has a link to a blog post noting how SP's book got 11 AP fact-checkers, but the Climate-gate emails only got 5, which some eagle-eyed AoS fan had already posted on here yesterday (HT The Hammer).

It's the ultimate example of the deciders deciding "there's nothing to see here...move-on.org..."

This story will not go away because there's just to much there, there, no matter how much the left plugs there ears and chant's B to the O, mmmm mmm mmmmmmmmmm.







Posted by: The Hammer at December 13, 2009 05:27 PM (YBTwf)

62
andy,
is David Suzuki your version of our Stephen Chu, a knowitall pointy-headed eco-thug in the government?

Posted by: the professor at December 13, 2009 05:29 PM (PaMcq)

63 Yeah, that Hummer guy has alot of great tips.

Posted by: andycanuck at December 13, 2009 05:29 PM (2qU2d)

64 I love Daily Mail. It's my guilty pleasure. One of the first sites I check in the morning, and usually before bed, too. They do a lot of tabloid gossip stuff with their celebrities, but they have a lot of right-wing followers that are always good for comments on the more political stuff.

Posted by: tdpwells at December 13, 2009 05:31 PM (Ei3oZ)

65 I'm just happy that the Daily Mail referred to this decade as the "Noughties".

Posted by: Anachronda at December 13, 2009 05:32 PM (LD+ZJ)

66 Suzuki's not directly in the government or civil service, professor, but a former genetecist (who hasn't published anything in that field in decades) and CBC TV "naturalist", now making most of his money fromthe not-for-profit Suzuki Foundation, so he's baciscally been paid with tax money (or tax write-offs) for all his life. Critics like Kate at Small Dead Animals call him Dr. Fruitfly. I've read that, similar to Al Gore's lifestyle, he has five properties and his main house is tax evaluated at Cdn $5-million. It's on a B.C.island that's only accessible by plane (or helicopter, I guess) or boat.

Posted by: andycanuck at December 13, 2009 05:35 PM (2qU2d)

67 That Monckton vid is priceless.

Posted by: Andy at December 13, 2009 05:37 PM (VMyjP)

68 An open market is a great thing. Who woul have thought the Russians would be behind stopping Cap and Trade.
I say it again the most Capitalistic country now is China.

Posted by: Kemp at December 13, 2009 05:37 PM (2+9Yx)

69
heh, sounds like we've got a Big Warmer industry

Big Climate?


Posted by: the professor at December 13, 2009 05:39 PM (XaQVn)

70

Editor Publisher died just a couple of weeks ago. Piss on its grave.

Posted by: andycanuck at December 13, 2009 05:19 PM (2qU2d)
The demise of Editor Publisher, unfortunately, appears to be premature.

Posted by: Tinian at December 13, 2009 05:40 PM (7+pP9)

71 Climate-gate is perhaps the ultimate opening for someone on our side to take control of the national debate and really swing things to the right.

There is, I believe, a large portion of the US population that believes in some type of AGW and probably won't completely shed those beliefs even with mounting evidence of shenanigans by AGW worshipers.

However, I think there are at least somewhat skeptical of man's role (from a percentage perspective) and are open to someone speaking to them about solid, everyday conservation ideas that are good for the planet and our resources without wrecking economies and demanding we all live in caves.

Not a denier, but not a AGW slave...dare I say, a moderate?

Anyway, SP started in this direction this week and the Goracle made the mistake of engaging her.

Not saying she's the one to take this ball and run with it, but the opportunity is there. The public wants someone to lead with common-sense ideas.


Posted by: The Hammer at December 13, 2009 05:41 PM (YBTwf)

72 FWIW: I screwed up, read a chart completely wrong, went off on it,
criticizing the Economist for reading the chart wrong while I was. I
was trying to find a different error I could pin on them when I
accidentally posted.

That's okay Ace, we still love you, in a non-ghey sort of way.

Posted by: chemjeff at December 13, 2009 05:45 PM (F+U5/)

73 Incomplete but sufficient list of papers disproving the AGW greenhouse hypothesis (Wielicki and Chen's two papers from 2002 are enough, and the GCR-climate link is the rapier thrust through the heart of the misbegotten beast) :

-- Satellite observations of atmospheric temperature and distributions of water vapor, and incoming and outgoing EM radiation, showing that IPCC models have been consistently over-estimating warming and the 'enhanced' greenhouse effect

Pierce D. W., T. P. Barnett, E. J. Fetzer, P. J. Gleckler (2006), Three-dimensional tropospheric water vapor in coupled climate models compared with observations from the AIRS satellite system, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L21701, doi:10.1029/2006GL027060.

John, V.O. and Soden, B. J., Temperature and humidity biases in global climate models and their impact on climate feedbacks, Geophys.Res. Lett., 34, L18704, doi:10.1029/2007GL030429

Gettleman, Collins, Fetzer, Eldering, Irion (2006), Climatology of Upper-Tropospheric Relative Humidity from the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder and Implications for Climate, J. Climate, 19, 6104-6121. DOI: 10.1175/JCLI3956.1

Wielicki, B.A., Wong, T., Allan, R.P., Slingo, A., Kiehl, J.T., Soden, B.J., Gordon, C.T., Miller, A.J., Yang, S.-K., Randall, D.A., Robertson, F., Susskind, J. and Jacobowitz, H. 2002. Evidence for large decadal variability in the tropical mean radiative energy budget. Science 295: 841-844.

Chen, J., Carlson, B.E. and Del Genio, A.D. 2002. Evidence for strengthening of the tropical general circulation in the 1990s. Science 295: 838-841.


-- The Sun has been magnetically more active in the 20th century than it has been for at least the last 8000 years:

Solanki, S.K., I.G. Usoskin, B. Kromer, M. Schssler and J. Beer. 2004. An unusually active Sun during recent decades compared to the previous 11,000 years. Nature, Vol. 431, No. 7012, pp.1084-1087, 28 October 2004.


-- Increasing evidence for an indirect solar effect on climate via modulation of galactic cosmic ray flux by variations in the solar magnetic field

N. J. Shaviv J. Veizer Celestial Driver of Phanerozoic Climate?

Nir J. Shaviv, "On Climate Response to Changes in the Cosmic Ray Flux and Radiative Budget"

Cosmoclimatology: a new theory emerges (Svensmark 2007) - this is a review of past publications on the Sun-GCR-climate link, including the vital work done by Nir Shaviv.

Svensmark, Bondo, Svensmark 2009, GRL Cosmic ray decreases affect atmospheric aerosols and clouds


If anyone has an hour to spare, some conservative, right-thinking science (not in the political sense) : CERN particle physicist Jason Kirby, head of the CLOUD experiment at CERN, goes through the evidence linking the Sun, galactic cosmic rays and variations of the Earths temperature over timescales of decades, centuries, and millenia to 500 million years.
http://tinyurl.com/yjnopjj

Posted by: o.u. at December 13, 2009 05:52 PM (OTnrK)

74 @44
You know what would be great? A Global Warming Hoax for Dummies post.

This isn't exactly that, but it's a very easily understood dissection of Michael Mann's own words, in their context from his own book, "Dire Consequences", of his "scientific methodology".

Mann inadvertently tells you his science is crap, then follows it up with the most bizarre definition of "high risk" you've ever read.

After reading it, you can easily understand why Climategate was the pre-ordained endpoint of global warming "science".

And yeah, it's on my crap blog.

Here's the link:

Fruit of the Poison Tree

Posted by: naturalfake at December 13, 2009 05:53 PM (HylJ6)

75 This is exactly what I was hoping for. This leak is giving doubting scientists an "out." They will be able to say that they weren't wrong, the data was wrong.

Posted by: 29Victor at December 13, 2009 05:54 PM (AfPnb)

76 The demise of Editor Publisher, unfortunately, appears to be premature.
That's not what I've read.

Posted by: andycanuck at December 13, 2009 06:06 PM (2qU2d)

77 We must ban hydrogen oxide; it's a killer.

Posted by: Pelayo at December 13, 2009 06:11 PM (8NGHm)

78 I look forward to the day of the double-disappearing post. At that point we will achieve total consciousness.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at December 13, 2009 06:14 PM (muUqs)

79 People that only get there news from the NY Times are the ones missing half the story.

It's not what they don't know, it's what they know that isn't so that's the problem.

Posted by: toby928 at December 13, 2009 06:19 PM (PD1tk)

80 Sorry, I pulled this story. I was still drafting it -- it was something
I was doodling around with it -- and accidentally posted it.

May Ace should buy one of those keyboards they give for the kids that ride in the short bus. You know, the ones with the big fat keys so they're easier to read.

Posted by: David in San Diego at December 13, 2009 07:35 PM (GF+6V)

81 @78

you mean "dihydrogen oxide" genius?

Posted by: hobbes at December 13, 2009 07:55 PM (WiOnI)

82 @78 and 82:



It's actually dihydrogen monoxide



Qwinn

Posted by: Qwinn at December 13, 2009 08:47 PM (SxA2Q)

83 you mean "dihydrogen oxide" genius? - Hobbes
It's really water, genius.
H2S is hydrogen sulfide, not dihydrogen mono sulfide.
There.

Posted by: Pelayo at December 13, 2009 09:23 PM (8NGHm)

84 This, he lamented, dilutes the message rather significantly.
And with that, a scientist removed his lab coat and became a political activist.
With science, the truth must become the message, not the other way around.

Posted by: Max Entropy at December 13, 2009 09:43 PM (6GIsB)

85 This climate-gate scandal is to the scaremongers what a terribly
embarrassing event that can never be lived down is to a school child.
It's something that will always be remembered, like that kid who pooped
his pants in sixth grade or that girl who tripped and fell during
eighth grade graduation--this is the reputation they are stuck with
from now on.

More like the guy who gets caught doing sex to the dairy cow at a party.

Posted by: mcassill at December 13, 2009 10:03 PM (S/REv)

86 I am still trying to figure out if the post can be rescued or if it's just a total complete screw-up.

If you had WordPress, you'd have several time-stamped post backups to choose from. But I've been telling you for years you should switch to WordPress.

Posted by: Christoph at December 14, 2009 01:00 AM (9KK8W)

87 Well, the Associated Press "fact-checked" the "stolen" emails (there is no evidence of theft or hacking, they might well have been leaked from the inside by someone disgusted with the ongoing fraud) and - surprise! - find they don't "prove" fraud.

Of course they don't. They do raise some serious questions, first among which is, "IF the 'science is settled,' WHY massage the data and pressure journals not to publish skeptical articles?" If everything is so neat and tidy, why the desperation to suppress information? Wouldn't they invite skeptical articles so they could conclusively refute them?

Why also discuss deleting (illegally) emails which might be subject to Freedom of Information disclosure? Why ask correspondents to claim an "expectation of confidentiality" in even the emails they received? These are not the acts of people who have all the facts on their side and nothing to hide, are they?

Please feel free to use your own common sense in figuring this out.

Posted by: Adjoran at December 14, 2009 04:58 AM (jmoP/)

88 where can i purchase an iphone

Posted by: where can i purchase an iphone at December 14, 2009 07:25 AM (S4a/k)

89 Everyone here is half of my age Standing in line, I'm hitching a ride I'll give it a try but I dont have the time abercrombie and fitchcheap abercrombie ukabercrombie online uk

Posted by: Abercrombie and Fitch at December 14, 2009 11:50 AM (Xose/)

90 مسلسلات رمضان - اناشيد -
اناشيد اطفال -
القران الكريم -
العاب للكمبيوتر
-
قصص -
روايات -
كتب -
فضائح -
خواطر -
اشعار
-
ازياء -
ازياء نسائيه -
ازياء اطفال -
ازياء المحجبات -
ازياء الحوامل
-
فساتين -
فساتين سهره -
فساتين اطفال -
فساتين جديده
-
تسريحات -
تسريحات شعر -
تسريحات جديده -
تسريحات بنات -
ازياء الحوامل
-
ازياء العروس -
العنايه بالبشره -
العنايه بالشعر -
لانجري
-
زفات -
زفات افراح -
ميك اب -
عطورات -
اكسسوارات
-
غرف نوم -
اكلات -
حلويات -
اثاث وديكور -
اطباق رئيسيه
-
صور -
نكت -
مباريات اليوم -
قطط -
خلفيات -
وظائف
-
مسلسلات -
يوتيوب -
مسلسلات تركيه -
مسلسلات يابانيه -
مسلسلات اجنبيه
-
مسرحيات -
اغاني مسلسلات -
مسرحيات كويتيه -
صور مسلسلات
هوليود -
Hollywood -
بوليود -
bollywood
بلاك بيري -
منتديات بلاك بيري -
توبيكات بلاك بيري -
صور للتصاميم
-
افلام -
افلام اجنبيه -
افلام عربيه -
افلام مصريه -
افلام هنديه
-
انمي -
افلام كرتون -
افلام ديزني -
مسلسلات انمي -
صور انمي -
توبيكات ملونه
-
توبيكات للماسنجر -
صور للماسنجر -
برامج جديده -
مسجات

Posted by: منتديات at May 15, 2010 10:21 PM (30B17)

91
منتديات - يوتيوب - توبيكات - افلام - بلاك بيري - توبيكات بلاك بيري - مسجات - صور للماسنجر - توبيكات للماسنجر - افلام كرتون - انمي - افلام هنديه - افلام مصريه - افلام تورنت - افلام اجنبيه - افلام - افلام مشاهده اون لاين - بوليود - هوليود - مسلسلات اجنبيه - مسلسلات كوريه - مسلسلات يابانيه - مسلسلات تركيه - مسرحيات - مسلسلات - غرف نوم - اكلات - زفات - لانجري - تسريحات - فساتين - فساتين سهره - قصص - روايات - كتب - فضائح - القران الكريم - اناشيد -

Posted by: منتديات at May 16, 2010 02:49 AM (hItul)

92















xp
































































4shared







youtube
google
4shared





Posted by: at June 24, 2011 01:21 PM (sdqM+)






Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.0239 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0114 seconds, 101 records returned.
Page size 75 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat