7Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteI completely ignore Rev. Al's report on global warming. I know he's a P O L I T I C I A N.Originally Posted by Roosveltrepub
AGW is real-American member
AGW is real-Non-American member
AGW is not real-American member
AGW is not real-Non American member
Yes The Economist's unsolicited collection report of bunk is being ignored. Do you think a Climatologists report on the financial crisis would be taken anymore serious? I am guessing you arent being told he is an E C O N O M I S T
I completely ignore Rev. Al's report on global warming. I know he's a P O L I T I C I A N.
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
I take it you didn't bother reading the article or links. Why don't you actually read it, then come back to comment and/or make more stupid assumptions...though something useful or intelligent would be welcome. I'll wait.
Last edited by Wooglin; 02 Jul 09, at 14:59.
Since you seem to be interested in what climate scientists have to say about it, here's submitted comments from some of them, all of which support Carlins own submission. Enjoy.
Dr John Christy comments
Dr Roy Spencer comments
Dr Roger Pielke Sr comments
William DiPuccio comments
Follow up to above article: Interview with Carlin of the EPA, who's report was stonewalled, can be found HERE
Alan Carlin is the economist and 38 year veteran at the Environmental Protection Agency whose report was stonewalled internally and so was not considered (or so he was told) in their decision to regulate CO2 as a pollutant. I spoke with him for an hour this evening. (A background interview with an anonymous source in the EPA that corroborates what Carlin says below can be found here.)
At the end of the hour, the last question I asked him was what had motivated him to come forward with an almost 100-page report written in 4 days detailing the problems with the scientific claims for global warming as given by the IPCC (an early draft can be found at http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/DOC062509-004.pdf). The report was not transmitted internally, and the emails released by CEI on Tuesday suggest to me that this may have been because the report did not support the previously determined conclusions desired by the new Administration.
In Carlin's personal view "The bottom line is whether or not the IPCC is wrong or right about the significance of increasing levels of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in increasing global temperatures--it is amazing how few people have asked that question. What's happening in Australia (where a Senator Fielding is holding a 'mini-debate' with skeptical scientists and administration advocates of an Australian cap and trade policy) is fantastic--why can't we do that here? Models, good or bad, don't prove or disprove a scientific hypothesis about the real world. I'm dreadfully concerned that we may be taking an ineffective and extremely costly action, and after six years of working on climate change I might be able to help--but I'm not allowed to."
Carlin got his first degree in physics, before he turned to economics and remembers lunching occasionally with the celebrated physicist Richard Feynman while at Caltech, who told him that if you attempt to compare observations with a hypothesis and the observations don't fit, you can either change the hypothesis or ascertain if the observations are wrong. Carlin is convinced that observations of climate do not match the hypothesis that human-generated greenhouse gases are producing significant global warming in the real world. He adds ruefully that if the NIPCC report recently released by the Heartland Institute had been available in March, when he wrote his report, it might have saved him a lot of time assuming that it covers many of the same points.
Carlin's main concern seems to be that the Endangerment Finding (an official declaration by the EPA that CO2 is a danger to public health and welfare) may actually turn out to be a time bomb that may explode in the EPA, echoing the reasoning of our anonymous source as reported earlier today. As I wrote then, the EPA does not want to regulate CO2 under the Clean Air act without legislation limiting their regulation to the largest emitters. If the proposed new cap and trade legislation (which removes EPA's ability to use the Clean Air Act to regulate global warming gases) is not forthcoming, Carlin worries that it may well be very difficult for the EPA to carry out its mandate. His report was an attempt to have the EPA reconsider the science (which Carlin considers bad science), as despite the respectable trappings that cloak the IPCC and their reports, their hypotheses fail many observational tests in his view. (and in the view of many climate scientists - wooglin)
Carlin has been transferred off all climate-related work, but is not at all bitter. He says that from a civil service point of view, his boss 'absolutely has the right' to give him new work assignments. "I still have a phone, I can still talk to people in my office," he says. (and yet the Astronomer/recently arrested Activist James Hansen still has a job controlling the GISS temp data - wooglin)
Carlin hastens to add that he did not turn over to the Competitive Enterprise Institute the emails that were published. "But when a reporter called Tuesday and asked me to verify them it became evident that CEI had them."
Carlin also assisted in the organization of a series of seminars with notable scientists in the field of climate science, including some notable skeptics as well as ardent "warmists." They were attended by an average of maybe 30 or 40 employees--but those employees only rarely included members of the workgroup that eventually would be charged with writing the proposed endangerment document.
Later we will discuss the science that Carlin wanted to present to the EPA. For now, he's another whistleblower who actually wanted to help the organisation that shut him out and moved him off the case.
Is this really how we want to run things?
Last edited by Wooglin; 02 Jul 09, at 16:16.
So let me get this straight. When the Faithful were hopping up and down about scientific consensus a couple of years ago, when one tried to bring up the fact that most of the people contributing their voices to The Cause were not, in fact, climatologists, that wasn't relevant. Now that a scientist is a "denier", it is relevant that he is not a climatologist.
I just want to make sure I understand how it works.
-dale
Oh that's an easy one. It's called "double standard."
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
From the Left? Surely not.
Surely not.
-dale
OK, how about this one. They have one standard for all: they're always right.
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
Hah! I like that one. "Hello, we're the Left, and we're always right."
-dale
We're beyond the scientific arguments. It's all about politics now, driven by public opinion here and abroad.
Could be we'll go fulll circle like the Australians.
To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato
Sure is!
We have not gone that far yet.Could be we'll go fulll circle like the Australians.
When Senator Fielding came back from the U.S he asked to see Senator Wong (KRudd govt chief climate change aperatchnik) so he could put some questions to her before deciding which way he was going to vote.
Apparently the answers he received from her were not satisfactory and the issue could still yet force a double dissoluiton of both houses meaning a new federal election.
You can count on it that Senator Fielding and all the other global warming heretics/doubters will be targetted by all the shrills.
By far the most read and most articulate blogger in Australia is Andrew Bolt. Rarely does a day go by when he does not have some information on this topic and others that are discussed here, from an Aussie perspective..
He can be read here; Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog
Cheers.
Sheep getting smaller in Scotland due to climate change, study says - Los Angeles TimesSheep getting smaller in Scotland due to climate change, study says
The average weight and size of sheep on a remote island have been falling in small but steady increments since 1985. Milder winters mean smaller animals but a larger herd.
By Karen Kaplan
July 3, 2009
Along with polar icecaps and sandy beaches, sheep on a remote Scottish island are gradually shrinking as a result of global warming, according to a study published today in the journal Science. The finding offers unusual proof that large animals are already evolving to adapt to changes wrought by climate change, experts said.
The average weight of sheep in the feral flock has been falling nearly 3 ounces per year since 1985, the researchers reported. The cumulative effect has been a 5% reduction in total body size.
That trend had puzzled scientists because they knew that evolution clearly favored larger sheep that are better equipped to survive the harsh winters of Hirta, a rocky outpost more than 100 miles west of mainland Scotland.
Now, using a sophisticated mathematical model, British and American researchers have concluded that warming temperatures have made it easier for scrawnier sheep to survive, thus reducing the average size of animals in the herd.
"Environmental change is having a substantial influence on the population," said Arpat Ozgul, a postdoctoral research associate at Imperial College London and lead author of the report.
That influence appears to have played out in a surprisingly intricate and counterintuitive manner, said UC San Diego biologist Kaustuv Roy, who wasn't involved in the study. For example, milder winters have helped the overall herd grow larger even as the average size of animals got smaller.
"Most of the thinking about how climate is going to affect species is fairly simplistic," Roy said. "These dynamics are fairly complex. We're going to have to sort out some of these details if we're ever going to make predictions about how individual species are going to respond to warming."
Scientists have long been interested in the relationship between climate and body size.
German biologist Christian Bergmann observed in 1847 that as members of a species migrate to higher latitudes with colder temperatures, their body size tends to increase. He speculated that larger bodies helped animals conserve heat by reducing their surface area relative to their volume.
More recently, Roy and others have proposed that the same mechanism could prompt body sizes to shrink when animals stay put but the climate around them gets warmer.
The Soay sheep of Hirta presented an opportunity to test that theory.
The brown sheep, named for their home island of Soay, were transported to the nearby isle of Hirta in 1932, two years after the last of its human inhabitants abandoned it. In the 1980s, scientists returned to study the flock's descendants. They visit at least once a year to conduct a census and take measurements.
"It's like an outside laboratory," Ozgul said.
For the new study, Ozgul and his colleagues analyzed a plethora of data, including the number of lambs born each year since 1985, the age of ewes giving birth and the survival rates of sheep at different ages. The team included body-weight measurements and the length of the hind leg to see whether the sheep were just thinner or actually smaller overall.
To measure the effect of climate, the researchers also incorporated the North Atlantic Oscillation index, which affects the strength of westerly winds in Europe and determines whether winters will be wet and mild or cold and dry. All of these terms were plugged into a mathematical formula that allowed them to measure the individual components that contributed to the change in sheep body size.
As expected, the researchers found that evolutionary pressure pushed the sheep to grow bigger. But that was offset by another, unexpected factor: Lambs born to yearling ewes instead of fully grown sheep weighed less at birth than their mothers did and remained smaller throughout their lifetimes.
Still, the "young mum effect" wasn't enough to account for the decrease in sheep size.
When the researchers added in the effect of changing environmental conditions, "you get just about the exact rate of decline that we've seen," said study coauthor Shripad Tuljapurkar, a biology professor at Stanford.
The researchers found that, on average, 1-year-old sheep now weigh 3.3 ounces less than they did in 1985. They attributed the decline to shorter, milder winters that allowed grass to grow later into the year. As a result, sheep can make it through the coldest months with fewer fat reserves, so more lambs born to young mothers survive in spite of their small size.
karen.kaplan@latimes.com
Dale, I know how much you love these "news." Have a wonderful 4th of July.)
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
Bolt is an absolute tool. He's discredited himself so much that any useful opinion he does have isn't read anymore. Too bad for him.
Fielding is an absolute gun. Serves it like he see's it. I actually like the guy.
Wong is an aparatchik feminist lezbian. Which makes her suited for the Climate Nazi Role of buying water licenses from people that never had water anyway. Bitch with a capital L.
Krudd is a tool too stupid milking the vote on things that are easy to score brownie poinits on, rather than focussing on energy infrastructure or development reform.
In short, its one great big sad joke.
That was actually funny, especially the part about the sheep evolving since 1985 due to climate change.Sheep getting smaller in Scotland due to climate change, study says - Los Angeles Times
Dale, I know how much you love these "news." Have a wonderful 4th of July.
To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: