Tuesday, February 16, 2010

If the tree of global warming fell in the living rooms of the media, and no one reported it, would it make a sound?

headline stolen from Brian at SixMeatBuffet.com

Chris Wood at The American Journalism Project talks about Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) fraud which is not being reported in American MSM:
The real scandal here isn’t scientific. It’s journalistic.
In a twist on the old legal saw, it is the equivalent of failing to shout fire in a crowded theater that is slowly filling with deadly fumes.

To pass it off as journalism is professional negligence.


Latest AGW fraud/scandal round up + explanatory commentary:

Phil Jones, the (former?) head of East Anglia CPU, gave a media interview and

If Anthropogenic Global Warming(AGW) is real, if carbon dioxide is accumulating in a runaway Greenhouse Effect, then how can it be that an Earth which is filled up with people, vehicles, and factories is cooler now than during the MWP?

There's plenty more from Jones. Marc Sheppard at American Thinker:
Imagine a man [Phil Jones of East Anglia CPU] who has spent the better part of the past 25 years toiling to convince the world of CO2-forced 20th-century warming now admitting that the difference in warming rates for the periods 1860-1880, 1910-40 and 1975-2009 is statistically insignificant. Jones even acceded that there has been no statistically-significant global warming since 1995; that in fact, global temperatures have been trending to the downside since January of 2002, although he denied the statistical significance of the -0.12C per decade decline.

2. Hmmmm: Phil Jones said: there has been no "statistically significant" global warming since 1995.

Same question: if carbon dioxide is accumulating in a runaway Greenhouse Effect, how can that be?

3. Phil Jones said: I attribute warming to man b/c I cannot attribute warming to either solar or volcanic activity.

Every aspect of this statement is bass-ackwards.

----- scientists are not supposed to attribute anything; especially are not supposed to then recommend the diminishment of economic wealth over something which is merely attributed; especially are not supposed to allow attribute to be widely misrepresented as settled science, thence allow misrepresented settled science to be used as justification for diminishing economic wealth.
------ warming. There has been, maybe, approx. 1 degree of warming (maybe .7 of a degree) since the cessation of the Little Ice Age at the end of the 19th Century, and this is perfectly normal for Earth. The notable warming - i.e. the warming which supposedly went significantly beyond 1 degree - and which was widely reported and relied upon for claims about warming such as Phil Jones is making here: was a lie. Thermometers used to record such warming were inordinately located near urbanization, and this skewed their readings towards too warm. Therefore, "warming", during the 20th Century, to any significant extent, is a lie. DID. NOT. HAPPEN. It's .... un .... freaking .... believable .... that the claim is a lie, yet it is. It simply is. It's one of the bald faced lies in all of history. And, there you have it: LIE.
------ b/c I cannot attribute it to either solar or volcanic activity. Where to begin? First, magma/volcanic activity has been understudied. El Nino, for instance, is beginning to be suspected of being caused by magma/volcanic activity. Second, Phil Jones is cavalierly dismissing solar activity which I suspect is the major cause of climate changes. Example: studies of sun spots show them tracking remarkably well with heating and cooling on Earth. More study is needed of both magma/volcanic factors and solar factors.
------- finally, Phil Jones neither enough respects the dynamic interconnectivity of the Earth's system of adjusting itself to stimulus, nor enough respects unknown unknowns. It's ludicrous to say: forget unknown unknowns, attribute warming which never actually happened to man, then destroy the world economy in response to this lying/fantasy/guesswork.

Ace of Spades:
Not only does [Phil Jones] say he doesn't agree that "the [AGW] debate is over," but that the vast majority of scientists (his words) don't think the debate is over, either.

So why do Al Gore and Barack Obama keep saying it is? Their boy -- boy! -- is himself saying that the debate is not over.

Ooops: I forgot a key admission. Phil Jones justifies his "hide the decline" tactics by admitting he includes tree ring proxies which are congruent with his theory and tossing out proxy series which undermine it.

More: Where is the American Media? Note that the BBC is doing actual journalism while the American media continues embargoing the story.

And note even the left-wing Guardian UK is writing balanced pieces here -- in this piece, they note that the "hockey stick" was thought badly flawed and cherry-picked even by the CRU.

And this continues to be incredibly important, because even as AGW comes apart under the very first scrutiny ever given to the "theory", the White House is planning on using inherent -- and invented -- executive powers to force a carbon-controlling regime on us that would never in a thousand years pass Congress.

And Oh Yeah: The Evidence That the Earth Has Warmed At All is In Serious Doubt: As related already by DrewM. A new peer-reviewed paper shows that temperature increases are greatly and consistently overstated, because the readings aren't properly adjusted down for factors like urbanization.

Lets depart from Mr. Jones and look at an IPCC which has been allowing unscientific speculation to be publicized as scientific conclusion. Some IPCC mistakes which have been admitted to within the last month:

--- claim that Himalayan Glaciers would melt by 2035. Oops. Lie.
--- claim that African agricultural production would be reduced by half by 2020. Oops. Lie.
--- claim that rising sea levels will imperil 55% of Netherlands which is below sea level. Except: 26% of the Netherlands is below sea level. Oops.

Now back to East Anglia, and it's promotion of Penn State University's Professor Michael Mann and his famous hockey stick graph. What of the Hockey stick methodology? Faked. The numbers were faked. Oops. Lie.

Staying in East Anglia, re it's promotion of MSM darling "NASA Scientist James Hansen!!!!" (constant MSM message: Ta da! NASA, BITCHES!) James Hansen's big contribution was analysis of surface thermometer readings which have now been admitted as inaccurate due to thermometer proximities to urbanization. BTW: "deniers" have been saying, for a number of years, that those thermometers were skewed by urbanization. James Hansen refused to admit it, and heaped media-promoted scorn upon the troglodyte, publicity seeking, mouth breathing, conspiracy theorist deniers. MSM may as well have been James Hansen's bought and paid for public relations firm.

More - Mark Landsbaum, writing in the Orange County Register, lists false claims which have been made by influential global warming advocates

Hitler gets the bad news about Climate Change fraud; doesn't take it well (link):

No comments: