Massive Leak! Proven Collusion to Stop GW Critics!

[Birkeland]

Birkeland you have outed me - with picture and all.

Deep Thought Rort is my essay.
Nice to see a little interdisciplinary cross publication.
Thank you for the post.

No, thank you for your intellectual integrity, your common sense and your willingness to speak out. I have followed the field of climate science for years, and there is only one conclusion that could be drawn about the AWG-hypothesis, as Wolfgang Pauli put it: Not even wrong - not even close.

[angler]

Nice link Steven.
To me the problem with GW theory generally is that they are using too many disparate types of sources/data, e.g. land temps, sea temps, satellite, ice-cores, tree-rings, etc. This combined with varying methodologies and standards over the last century or more, means that there is too much adjusting, calibrating, converting, smoothing, etc required to merge the different data. All this leaves too much room for subjective judgements or guesstimates.

Precisely! Obfuscation through complexity.

Some of these sources were not intended to measure global temperatures. There is, for instance a comment in the article about satellite technology and the troposphere. And as I understand things, tree-rings are indicators of sunlight not temperature per se.

Quite so! Trees are not thermometers.

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Angler,
You wrote:

Quite so! Trees are not thermometers

I can think of a quite simple way to demonstrate the difference to climate experts. 'Bend over......'

[Komorikid]

This is a very interesting article that explains why the data used has little or no validity.

There are also some very interesting comments about the nature of gravity and its inability to be modelled efectively in the real world.

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/11824

[Grey Cloud]

This is a very interesting article that explains why the data used has little or no validity.

There are also some very interesting comments about the nature of gravity and its inability to be modelled efectively in the real world.

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/11824

Good, informative article. Thanks.

[StefanR]

Open Letter to UN Secretary-General


His Excellency Ban Ki Moon

Secretary-General, United Nations

New York, NY

United States of America


December 8, 2009


Dear Secretary-General,


Climate change science is in a period of ‘negative discovery’ - the more we learn about this exceptionally complex and rapidly evolving field the more we realize how little we know. Truly, the science is NOT settled.


Therefore, there is no sound reason to impose expensive and restrictive public policy decisions on the peoples of the Earth without first providing convincing evidence that human activities are causing dangerous climate change beyond that resulting from natural causes. Before any precipitate action is taken, we must have solid observational data demonstrating that recent changes in climate differ substantially from changes observed in the past and are well in excess of normal variations caused by solar cycles, ocean currents, changes in the Earth's orbital parameters and other natural phenomena.


We the undersigned, being qualified in climate-related scientific disciplines, challenge the UNFCCC and supporters of the United Nations Climate Change Conference to produce convincing OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE for their claims of dangerous human-caused global warming and other changes in climate. Projections of possible future scenarios from unproven computer models of climate are not acceptable substitutes for real world data obtained through unbiased and rigorous scientific investigation.

Specifically, we challenge supporters of the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused climate change to demonstrate that:


Variations in global climate in the last hundred years are significantly outside the natural range experienced in previous centuries;

Humanity’s emissions of carbon dioxide and other ‘greenhouse gases’ (GHG) are having a dangerous impact on global climate;
Computer-based models can meaningfully replicate the impact of all of the natural factors that may significantly influence climate;
Sea levels are rising dangerously at a rate that has accelerated with increasing human GHG emissions, thereby threatening small islands and coastal communities;
The incidence of malaria is increasing due to recent climate changes;
Human society and natural ecosystems cannot adapt to foreseeable climate change as they have done in the past;
Worldwide glacier retreat, and sea ice melting in Polar Regions , is unusual and related to increases in human GHG emissions;
Polar bears and other Arctic and Antarctic wildlife are unable to adapt to anticipated local climate change effects, independent of the causes of those changes;
Hurricanes, other tropical cyclones and associated extreme weather events are increasing in severity and frequency;
Data recorded by ground-based stations are a reliable indicator of surface temperature trends.

It is not the responsibility of ‘climate realist’ scientists to prove that dangerous human-caused climate change is not happening. Rather, it is those who propose that it is, and promote the allocation of massive investments to solve the supposed ‘problem’, who have the obligation to convincingly demonstrate that recent climate change is not of mostly natural origin and, if we do nothing, catastrophic change will ensue. To date, this they have utterly failed to do.




Signed by:

Science and Technology Experts Well Qualified in Climate Science

http://www.copenhagenclimatechallenge.o ... e&Itemid=1

[Birkeland]

Wikipedia's climate doctor:

One person in the nine-member Realclimate.org team -- U.K. scientist and Green Party activist William Connolley -- would take on particularly crucial duties. Connolley took control of all things climate in the most used information source the world has ever known -Wikipedia. Starting in February 2003, just when opposition to the claims of the band members were beginning to gel, Connolley set to work on the Wikipedia site. He rewrote Wikipedia's articles on global warming, on the greenhouse effect, on the instrumental temperature record, on the urban heat island, on climate models, on global cooling. On Feb. 14, he began to erase the Little Ice Age; on Aug. 11, the Medieval Warm Period. In October, he turned his attention to the hockey stick graph. He rewrote articles on the politics of global warming and on the scientists who were skeptical of the band. Richard Lindzen and Fred Singer, two of the world's most distinguished climate scientists, were among his early targets, followed by others that the band especially hated, such as Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, authorities on the Medieval Warm Period.

All told, Connolley created or rewrote 5,428 unique Wikipedia articles. His control over Wikipedia was greater still, however, through the role he obtained at Wikipedia as a website administrator, which allowed him to act with virtual impunity. When Connolley didn't like the subject of a certain article, he removed it -- more than 500 articles of various descriptions disappeared at his hand. When he disapproved of the arguments that others were making, he often had them barred -- over 2,000 Wikipedia contributors who ran afoul of him found themselves blocked from making further contributions. Acolytes whose writing conformed to Connolley's global warming views, in contrast, were rewarded with Wikipedia's blessings. In these ways, Connolley turned Wikipedia into the missionary wing of the global warming movement.

The Medieval Warm Period disappeared, as did criticism of the global warming orthodoxy. With the release of the Climategate Emails, the disappearing trick has been exposed. The glorious Medieval Warm Period will remain in the history books, perhaps with an asterisk to describe how a band of zealots once tried to make it disappear.

http://www.financialpost.com/opinion/st ... 78af9cb409