Articles Tagged "Meetings"

The Science and Technology Committee will hold an oral evidence session following-up to the previous committee’s report on the disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.

The session will be on:

Wednesday 8 September 2010 at 10.30 am

Thatcher Room, House of Commons

The Committee will take evidence from Lord Oxburgh, who headed the International Panel that was set up by the University to assess the integrity of the research published by the Climatic Research Unit.

An oral evidence session with Sir Muir Russell, who headed the Independent Climate Change E-mails Review, will be announced in October.

The sessions will focus on how the two reviews responded to the former committee’s recommendations about the reviews and how they carried out their work.

Inquiry page: The Reviews into the Climatic Research Unit’s E-mails at the University of East Anglia

At this Monthly event we will discuss
1) A review of the competing summer forecasts for Britain Ireland & Europe!
2) Why the jet stream 'getting stuck' is so important. How we can predict when mobility will return and will Russia superheat, and Pakistan and China superFloods recur next summer
3) SatelliteGate - the latest Global warming scandal and will politicians ever listen?

Meeting location: Frid 27th Aug 12noon at WeatherAction, Delta House, 175-177 Borough High st SE1 1HR, London

As summer ends we will Review competing forecasts! Then discuss jet stream shifts and SatelliteGate - the latest GlobalWarmers scandal

After Dramatic success in predicting the increase in VERY EXTREME weather events around the world this summer and specifically the West Russia heatwave and the Jet Stream shifts which brought its end and also the decline in Pakistan superdeluges, Piers Corbyn continues the matters raised in his interview (broadcast 22 Aug) on Russia TV - See:

Click source to read FULL report from Piers Corbyn and also note details of the next WeatherAction.com meeting for Friday 30th July

Tuesday, 13 July 2010, 19:00 - 21:00 - Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining, 1 Carlton House Terrace, London SW1Y 5DB

Seats are available on a first-come, first-served basis.

To register, please e-mail: info@thegwpf.org or phone 207 9306856

On 7 July, Sir Muir Russell will publish the findings of the Independent Climate Change Email Review into what is commonly known as the 'Climategate' Affair. The Global Warming Policy Foundation is holding a public meeting to assess the procedures, conclusions and implications of the Review and the lessons of Climategate.

Stephen McIntyre and David Holland are internationally recognised critics of the flawed expert advisory process that governments continue to rely on. Both are the subject of frequent references in the 'Climategate' emails (McIntyre is mentioned over 100 times) and both contributed written submissions of evidence to the Muir Russell inquiry. According to the BBC, McIntyre "arguably knows more about CRU science than anyone outside the unit - but none of the CRU inquiries has contacted him for input."

The meeting will be chaired by Dr Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

Click source to read FULL report by Piers Corbyn

Just been reading Climate: The Counter Consensus (Stacey International) the new book by Bob Carter – that’s New Zealand’s Professor Robert M Carter to you, mate: he’s one of the world’s leading palaeoclimatologists – and it’s a cracker. By the end, you’re left feeling rather as I did after the Heartland Conference, that the scientific case against AGW is so overwhelming that you wonder how anyone can still speak up for so discredited a theory without dying of embarrassment.

All the same, it’s good to be reminded now and again why the “consensus” thinking on AGW simply doesn’t stand up. There are so many excellent examples from Prof Carter’s book, I might be forced to spread them out over several blogs.

Take his chapter on the oceans. The other day some troll or other was brandishing a figure he’d got from NOAA, showing that the sea was warming. Well bully for you troll, but if you understand at all how climate works that fact does precisely zilch to support the case for AGW. Why?

The good Prof explains:

The ocean covers more than 70 per cent of the Earth’s surface and over much of its area it is 3-5km deep. Comprising water, which is one thousand times denser than air the ocean has far more mass than the atmosphere – notwithstanding that the atmosphere covers the entire planet and is 50 km high to the top of the stratosphere. The result of this is that the ocean has a much greater heat capacity than the atmosphere, specifically 3,300 times more. Put another way, all the heat energy contained in the atmosphere is matched by the heat content of only the upper 3.2 metres of the worldwide ocean.

DONT MISS IF YOUR IN LONDON FRIDAY 28th MAY - See Below for Details on Bob Carter Meeting in London

In the wake of the Climategate scandal, panelists and audience members at the Fourth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC4) indicated growing confidence that the tide is turning in favor of those who believe that manmade global warming is not a crisis.

More than 700 people — including a good many scientists, along with economists, policy analysts, and legislators — have gathered together since Sunday night, discussing the once-settled but increasingly controversial proposition of an anthroprogenic global warming (AGW) crisis. Any triumphalism was averted by a general agreement to explore real-world facts and test the assertions of alarmists. The presenters and audience members continually asked whether the data says what the modelers say it does.

The conference opened with a Sunday evening dinner at which Canadian statistical analyst Stephen McIntyre presented a meticulous history of the hugely influential “hockey stick” graph — which found an alarming rise of global temperatures since 1979 and led to the IPPC conclusion that AGW is causing a global crisis that requires drastic measures. McIntyre had begun publicly questioning the data several years ago, setting off an effort which ultimately led to the recent Climategate scandal, in which it was shown that the people behind the hockey stick graph knowingly altered the temperature record in a way that expanded a relatively common global temperature change into a shocking heat spike.

For the fourth time in the past three years scientists, economists and policymakers are gathering to explore both the causes and consequences of “climate change,” and the cost and effectiveness of currently proposed “remedies.” Also for the fourth time in the past three years, the Heartland Institute’s International Conference on Climate Change, which commences this Sunday, has been all but ignored by the mainstream media. And as reliable as the MSM have become in evading the event’s purpose, so have the alarmist media become in distorting it.

This year’s early entry appeared on Thursday, when former RFK Jr. Research Associate and onetime EPA “environmental justice advocate” Brendan DeMelle let the green games begin with this hysterically deluded posting at HuffPo.

According to DeMelle, the MSM’s “lack of interest” in what he brands a “non-event” stems not from liberal media bias, but rather “from the fact that this denial-a-palooza fest is dripping with oil money and represents a blatant industry effort to greenwash oil and coal while simultaneously attacking the credibility of climate scientists.”

How strikingly original – even the excruciatingly unclever “denial-a-palooza” was boosted from Greenpeace Research Director Kert Davies, who spread the term around like so much environment-friendly fertilizer during ICCC’s maiden voyage to NY City in 2008. And exactly which “climate scientists’” credibility is DeMelle so deeply concerned about? If perchance those paid to toe the green line for NASA, NOAA, CRU or the IPCC, then, as we’ve reported here, here, here, and here, respectively, there’s not much left of it standing on which to bear down upon. Needless to say, DeMelle’s lame attempt to defend the honor of those discredited entities by referencing last month’s laughable Lord Oxburgh Climategate whitewash falls dreadfully short of the mark.

Online media leader offers viewers on-the-ground coverage of International Conference on Climate Change

EL SEGUNDO, Calif., May 13 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — PJTV today announced it will stream LIVE coverage of the Heartland Institute’s 4th Annual International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC-4) – a worldwide gathering of global warming “realists” – from Chicago, IL, on May 16-18. The online television network will offer viewers videos and analysis from each keynote speaker as well as a number of the conference events.

“Climategate is hotter than ever – especially after the introduction of Sens. Kerry and Lieberman’s American Power Act,” said Roger L. Simon, CEO of Pajamas Media. ”New evidence calls into question the impact human activity had on global temperatures in the 20th Century. Nonetheless, many opinion leaders and Members of Congress fail to discuss these new scientific discoveries that dismantle the liberal agenda. PJTV is excited to bring viewers a different part of the debate than is portrayed on Capitol Hill or in the main stream media.”

Continuing their coverage of Climategate, PJTV will bring the global conference into the homes of viewers across the nation with all-day, exclusive coverage throughout the conference’s duration. The three-day assembly, entitled “Reconsidering Science and Economics,” will inform conference-goers about new scientific discoveries that force researchers to reassess humans’ impact on global warming. Additionally, economists will be on hand to discuss calculations about the financial weight of slowing or stopping global warming, comparing this data to the perceived social benefits.

Legislation and regulation aimed at controlling greenhouse gas emissions are predicated on the belief that science definitively shows that man's greenhouse gas emissions are causing the Earth's temperature to rise, with serious deleterious effects.

What if the cause-and-effect relationships between GHGs and temperature are greatly overstated? What if the data used to measure temperature change and its effects are of poor quality? What if we don't adequately understand important climatic systems (such as clouds or oceans) to simulate them accurately in the computer models used to predict climatic change? What if the stated positions of key scientific societies are under assault by the member rank and file? What if the state of empirical knowledge points to only a small human effect on climate? What if the best scientific information we have does not justify the economic costs associated with proposed legislation and regulation?

The answers to these questions directly impact the legislative and regulatory debates underway in the Congress and the Obama Administration.

On May 14, Dr. William Happer and Dr. Roger Cohen will review key features of climate science.

Click PDF file to see Invitation