Articles Tagged "Comment"

The following YouTube illustrates how the media and the Met Office put through the "Next Ice Age" story in the 1970's as fact, in the same way they have put through "Man Made Climate Change" in recent years.

In our article Times Daily, 11 Sep, 1972: "Expert Claims Ice Age Creeping Up" I pointed out that the Met Office had used a branch of climate mathematical analysis to show how the previous 20 years (1952-1972) had cooled, and yet they are now showing warming for the same time span. This video goes further and shows 30 years of cooling! TheHocketSchtick blog Deja Vu 72 has been updated to show modern data clearly indicating this so called "cool period" has become "warm" to fit in with "Man Made Climate Change". What a tangled web the Met Office weave!

This video gives background about the 70s ice age scare with an update about some the principal figures. iloveemo1984

We recently posted the Richard Black article 'Rapid' 2010 melt for Arctic ice - but no record, although Richard is in the "Man Made" climate change camp, he posted some very good news that things were not as bad this year in the Arctic. However, as you will read, this had not gone down very well with Joe Romm.......Has Richard started to see the light? Reading through this latest blog, he may well have, fingers crossed, and well done to him for standing his ground.

'Warmist' attack smacks of 'sceptical' intolerance

It seems that something new, and not altogether welcome, may be happening in the politicking over climate change.

I have written before of the orchestrated villification that comes the way of climate scientists from some people and organisations who are unconvinced of the case for human-induced climate change - "sceptics", "deniers", as you wish.

Journalists, including your humble correspondent, receive our fair share too.

This week, for the first time, I am seeing the same pattern from their opponents.

Joe Romm, the physicist-cum-government-advisor-cum-polemicist, posted a blog entry highly critical of the Arctic ice article I wrote last week.

Will this newspaper snippet from the Times Daily, dated the 11 Sept, 1972, start another "New Zealand Climate Scam"?

Thanks to the blog, TheHockeySctick, we can see the full newspaper article The site then went on to plot a graph using the current data for the 1952-1972 period, and guess what, the trend was UP and NOT down.

Did the Met Office use a different branch of climate mathematical analysis in 1972, or has the data been corrupted?

And why did the Head Of The Met Office at the time put forward that the SUN as being resposible for the changes in our climate, and yet this rather important issue is NOT on the Met Office radar as of today?

Click source to read what could be the start of the "Met Office Climate Scam"

It's not often that I see a headline story and put in a comment, but this one is a case of Beware of Greeks bearing gifts. The UN are congratulating the human race for saving the world from an expanding ozone layer made from "Man Made" pollution. They (the UN) do not mention any solar influence in this statement, as that would not fit in with the "Man Made" theory. The fact is during the past few years our Sun has had a dramatic transformation, in that, there has been a virtual halt to the Sun's higher then average sunspot activity that we have seen in recent years. This spurious analysis of the ozone layer by the UN makes an interesting conclusion, a reduction of "Man Made" pollution reduces the output of the Sun. The conclusion from yours truly says a reduction of the output of the Sun results in a smaller ozone area, but who wants to know that! I'm sure WUWT will have something to say on this, hopefully the same and more.

LEADING scientists say the ozone layer is starting to repair itself and will eventually give us much greater protection from skin cancer.

They say that phasing out almost 100 substances once used in such products as refrigerators and aerosols has stopped the layer from further depletion.

Ozone in the stratosphere is important because it absorbs most of the sun’s dangerous ultraviolet radiation, which can lead to skin cancer and eye damage.

Although it is not yet increasing again, the ozone layer outside the polar regions is, by the year 2048, expected to recover to the levels it was at 30 years ago.

The United Nations report, Scientific Assessment Of Ozone Depletion 2010, paints a much more optimistic picture than previous assessments and is the first comprehensive update in four years.

It argues that action taken through the Montreal Protocol, which began in 1987 and has introduced the reduction of harmful emissions, has helped to halt the damage.

Achim Steiner, UN under-secretary general and environmental programme executive director, said: “Without the Protocol, levels of ozone-depleting substances could have increased tenfold by 2050.

“This, in turn, could have led to up to 20 million more cases of skin cancer and 130 million more cases of eye cataracts, not to speak of the damage to human immune systems, wildlife and agriculture.”

EVERYONE makes mistakes but the gaff made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was a howler of remarkable proportions.

In 2007 this supposedly distinguished body issued a report whose central claim was that due to global warming the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035.

They meant to say 2350. Maybe. When the error was revealed, the chairman of the IPPC, Rajendra Pachauri arrogantly refused to apologise. He is now under pressure to stand down following the findings of a United Nations review of the panel’s working practices. Whereas the global warming lobby generally likes to scare the pants off the public, this review is couched in the most gentlemanly terms recommending that the current term of the chairman be cut from 12 years to six. Mr Pacharui has been in the job since 2002 so the message is muted but obvious: clear your desk and go.

Faith in climate-change scientists who preach that we are all doomed has been badly shaken by this fiasco, by Al Gore’s flawed film An Inconvenient Truth and by the e-mails leaked from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit last year. Most sane people care about the environment but they do not take kindly to being lied to, preached at or needlessly frightened.

Scientists must remember that their job is to present facts not scare stories.

The following letter was sent to the Houston Chronicle by a Robert Curl who turns out to be Kenneth S. Pitzer-Schlumberger Professor of Natural Sciences Emeritus at Rice University. He shared the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1996.....your see a follow up to this below from several "skeptics" including Edwin Berry, enjoy!

The Houston Chronicle recently published an op-ed by the former astronaut Walter Cunningham "Climate change alarmists ignore scientific methods", Page B10, Aug. 15). The tenor of his piece was that the scientists concerned about climate change were an unscientific fringe group outside the mainstream of science. I quote: "It [anthropogenic global warming] has gained little acceptance among legitimate scientists." Cunningham's article assumed a tone of authority, but obviously his researches into the subject were not thorough.

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) was incorporated in 1863 by an act of Congress to serve the nation by providing advice on scientific matters. It consists of approximately 2,100 members (out of approximately 1 million U.S. scientists) and 380 foreign associates. Of the 2,480 members, nearly 200 have won Nobel Prizes. U.S. scientists consider election to the academy one of the greatest honors they can receive.

For 147 years the NAS has jealously guarded its reputation for providing unbiased advice to the nation on scientific matters. This august organization is deeply concerned about the consequences of anthropogenic climate change, and has carried out several detailed technical studies on this matter. You can download free a layman's explanation, Understanding and Responding to Climate Change, from the National Academy's website at http://dels-old.nas.edu/basc/climate-change/ in order to obtain the most authoritative information on the subject.

If only these FOOLS could make contact with Piers Corbyn

Conference in Boulder will step up world's efforts to establish an early warning system for extreme weather events.

The world's leading climate scientists will gather this week in the United States to hammer out plans to set up an early warning system that would predict future meteorological disasters caused by global warming.

The meeting, in Boulder, Colorado, has been arranged at diplomatic level amid fears that storms, hurricanes, droughts, flooding and other extreme weather events now threaten to trigger widespread devastation in coming decades. A series of meteorological catastrophes have dominated headlines in recent weeks, while scientists have warned that figures so far for this year suggest 2010 will be the hottest on record.

Recent events include a record-breaking heatwave that has seen Moscow blanketed with smog from burning peatlands, the splintering of a giant island of ice from the Greenland ice cap, and floods in Pakistan that have claimed the lives of at least 1,600 people and left 20 million homeless.

The last time I produced a "Solar Climate Change" forecast from Piers Corbyn's work I expected to see a dramatic change to the weather in the UK, however it was not until the UK rainfall measurements had been summarised by the Met Office for the entire month of July I noticed the effect of this WeatherAction prediction. In all fairness the forecast did contain a succession of solar activity from the initial burst starting on the 10-12 July, and if I had followed this to the letter I would have been able to demonstrate the "Record Wet July" in more detail.

The July "Solar" climate change for the UK summer period started bang on cue and continued throughout July, but it also heralded the start of the Moscow heatwave and the Pakistan Floods, according to Piers Corbyn these two events have been predicted to end from Mid August when another change to the Earth's climate takes place with a major "Solar Climate Change".

The August "Solar" climate change starts from the 15th (give or take a day), and no doubt we will see changes in the "jet stream" location with major weather reports concerning "floods" "storms" and who knows, a +7 Earthquake or a Volcanic eruption or both. The "Solar" climate change runs between 15th - 19th

The following page is taken from the Met Office site, it's a typical one sided view of climate change that should NOT be part of our child's education. If any of you can get together and put forward a counter view of climate change for child education from a Climate Realist perspective, please contact us.

Live resources for Key Stages 1 through to 5

The Met Office is hosting a series of free video conferences for schools and colleges in England. Offering a unique and interactive aid to learning in the classroom, each 45 minute presentation is bespoke, having been tailored around the questions your students want to put us and is delivered by our own weather and climate experts.

This service is funded by the Department for Education

Before you apply, please read the following important information.

Please ensure your school or college has the facility to run a video conference before applying.

Schools and colleges must be registered with JANET. You will be required to enter your venue address as registered with JANET in our online booking form. Please ensure this is entered accurately as the video conference will be booked using these details.

As the number of available video conferences is limited, schools and colleges can only participate in one conference during the 2010-11 programme.

Here we have an insight to the "failed" IPCC "learning" pricipals of "Public Relations", if only they addressed the spurious science the rest would follow, instead they keep "polishing the turd".

Andy Revkin's revelations over the weekend about the botched media relations strategy deployed by the head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra Pachauri, demonstrate that the IPCC has failed to learn from its recent missteps in managing public communications.

If you don't have anything to hide, don't act as if you do.

Being thrust into the media spotlight and subjected to sudden intense scrutiny can rattle any organization, and the IPCC is hardly the first institution to be accused of resorting to a "bunker mentality" and evading media inquiries. But, as Revkin points out correctly, sheltering yourself from the press is bound to backfire, creating more skepticism about your activities when you should really focus on explaining your work more clearly and operating with greater transparency.

For an organization like the IPCC - which has been accused of holding information too closely to its chest - to send an open letter advising its lead authors and editors to "keep a distance from the media" demonstrates PR mismanagement at its worst. It reinforces the perception that IPCC leadership doesn't really know what it is doing.