Monday, February 15, 2010

Alarmists out in the cold

A recent report indicates that the UN global warming data has consistently been falsely elevated due to the proximity of many of the measuring equipment to heat islands such as mechanical equipment and buildings. The report shows photographs of weather stations near heat-generating equipment which would distort their readings.

The findings cast further doubt on evidence put forward by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) which claims the science supporting rising temperatures is unequivocal.

In response, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, a lead author of the chapter of the IPCC report that deals with the observed temperature changes, acknowledged that there were problems with the global thermometer record but said these had been accounted for in the final report.

“It’s not just temperature rises that tell us the world is warming,” he said. “We also have physical changes like the fact that sea levels have risen around five inches since 1972, the Arctic icecap has declined by 40 per cent and snow cover in the northern hemisphere has declined.”

According to whom? On what basis? Has the reporting been held up to scrutiny and subject to review by anyone interested in the question? Are the results reproducible? Given what we now know about the handling of Global Warming 'science', is there any reason to take anything AGW proponents propose seriously?

As we see here, what has been 'hacked' or used for political and financial purpose, is not the Hadley CRU files, but the entire field of science as it pertains to global warming.
"The interests of Hulme and Pachauri are clear. Use the science arm at CRU to drive conclusions in the IPCC that will drive funding into Tyndall and drive money into TERI, Pachauri’s organization, and CRU."

The following recommendations seem sound to me if we are ever to trust anything emanating from this field of science again:
"The notion that science can move forward while individual climate scientists hide data from their critics is antithetical to the dictates of reason. CRU and others have no more excuses. All and any data used in climate science should be published under a Creative Commons like license, free for anyone to view and use. Confidential data should not be used; it is not necessary to the science. Phil Jones should be removed as an advisor to NOAA on data archiving and access. That’s having a black hat hacker in charge of the hardware. The code of climate science should likewise be freely available. In particular, we should press climate science to adopt a GPL license, one that enforces sharing of code."

There are no sources of information that I find to be compelling, simply because it is clear that the science was kidnapped to advance an agenda.


  1. There are no sources of information that I find to be compelling

    Maybe it's just me, but this just seems to sum up trying to figure out what's going on anywhere these days.

  2. Heavens to Mergatroid.

    This thing is coming off the rails faster than I can keep up and post with everything else going on.

    Good work, Nick.

    (oh--BTW--fantastic picture too)

    But now here's MY main question:

    Nick, where is the "Come to Jesus" moment for the AGW crowd. Obviously they'll fight to the bitter end and maybe even up to the point where it's snowing in Honduras and snow chains are being bought for cars in Miami. And there is much prestige and power and money riding on all this (I've seen the stats my goad at WUWT on who REALLY spends what on what. And it ain't Exxon-Mobile. There is also much credibility and "science" jabber and POLITICAL POWER at stake, that, as Steynposts point out over and over, is not easily given up now the the AGW supplants socialism as the new way to "global governance" and taxation and control of people.

    This is now firmly on ideological grounds, whereas as Steyn pointed out the pretense was that this was all mothers-milk pure and "above" all other considerations. After all, who wants to "harm" Gaia?? (See Avatar and tree gods.)

    The perfect mix to make socialism head our way by force instead of calling it "socialism."

    But just when is the gig up, Nick?

    When is AGW the towel tossed in, and the sheepish apologies from Gore and NASA's Hansen and 50 other main players on this scene?

    The latest is that the reason AGW (WARMING) was giving us MORE snow (though the opposite was said by Boxer and Byrd--I have the videos) was that "lake effect" snows in the Northeast were moving vapor from the Great Lakes and the warming was sending it eastward.

    IE--global warming prevents the Great Lakes from freezing over any more. So we're told.

    Update: Lake Erie is frozen over.

    Too delicious.

  3. I didn't cover evertying, but this is a good finale, for now, to the other posts, and touch on some other areas. Heavy borrowing from Nick, Mark(Steyn), and Mike(Fumento).

    Phil Jones, Al Gore, George Monbiot, Lord Monckton, and others make some shots as well.


    If you're not familiar yet, you might like the two links above as well. Getting more interesting by the hour, Nick.

  5. I've been working my way through your tome on the subject. Wow. It is a very good post, Wakefield. The political insights are creepily on the money.

  6. Nick I admit it is not crisp, and the longer I delayed the more crap I ended up having to pour through and the longer things got, perhaps to the detriment of the post and the main point. So much has happened since adding links and comments with this disaster unfolding and all the alibis I felt I needed to answer I just decided to stick to the main philosophical point, and leave some of the details to the links of yours and others and some commentary about the bummed coding, et al.

    I found that covering all the bases on this matter while everything else going on in life (the bills or work don't stop to stand aside while posting) that I think it got a little beyond me. This might have to be the last of such posts for some time.

  7. For a lifetime. It's the mother of all posts! I liked the first two thirds, and I am sure the last third will not disappoint.

    Good on ya, Wakefield!