• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Global Warming/Climate Change Super Thread

No discussion or dissension allowed (or aloud):

Climate change skeptic's university course criticized
By Emily Chung, CBC News
Posted: Mar 2, 2012 4:58 AM ET

A group of scientists is raising alarm about "incorrect science" in a course at Ottawa's Carleton University that was taught for three years by a climate change skeptic.

"We describe a case in which noted climate change deniers have gained access to the Canadian higher education system through a course taught at Carleton University," the Ottawa-based Committee for the Advancement of Scientific Skepticism said in a report this week.

More at Link

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Heretic! Burn the skeptic!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt0Y39eMvpI
 
Common tactic of (mostly) the progressives in the world.  "You oppose us?  You are unintelligent/wrong/(insert insulting term here)"

Instead of calling the professor a professor, they instead labelled him a "climate change denier".  This is clever.  For after repeating the same lie over and over again, it begins to stick.  You see, they don't assume or suppose that he has an opposing view as a result of critical and independent analysis of the whole thing.  Oh, no.  You see, they call him a "denier", which assumes that climate change is a fact.  It's not just them, either.  Any "progressive" group will label opponents as haters, and use shame to get their way. 

Why they do this?  Hubris.  They are the Supreme Beings, and nothing is going to tell them otherwise.  "Ecce homo?  NO!  ECCE NOBIS!!!!"

(sorry, just my rant)

 
interesting . . .

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-80Kvw92W34/T1KoJ-bOUbI/AAAAAAAAVf0/Ie1AtKGvkow/s1600/Booker+wind+01.jpg

How green energy makes "sense" in England.  Probably the same system being used to build Dalton's Green Utopia in Ontario by diverting funds into the Feed In Tariffs mechanism. 

Because no matter how it adds up, if the subsidies are added directly to the Electric bills or if they are hidden and paid out of General Revenues or Tax Credits whatever, it is going to be a huge drain on the wallets of the citizens of Ontario.

Because it is very, very expensive to feel green.

Apologies to Kermit.

 
Here's an article that is pretty much exactly why I don't have a lot of time for industry apologists who've attacked actual scientists. From the Guardian, reproduced as Fair Dealing:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/mar/03/michael-mann-climate-change-deniers?CMP=twt_gu

The scientist who has borne the full brunt of attacks by climate change deniers, including death threats and accusations of misappropriating funds, is set to hit back.

Michael E. Mann, creator of the "hockey stick" graph that illustrates recent rapid rises in global temperatures, is to publish a book next month detailing the "disingenuous and cynical" methods used by those who have tried to disprove his findings. The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars is a startling depiction of a scientist persecuted for trying to tell the truth.

Among the tactics used against Mann were the theft and publication, in 2009, of emails he had exchanged with climate scientist Professor Phil Jones of East Anglia University. Selected, distorted versions of these emails were then published on the internet in order to undermine UN climate talks due to begin in Copenhagen a few weeks later. These negotiations ended in failure. The use of those emails to kill off the climate talks was "a crime against humanity, a crime against the planet," says Mann, a scientist at Penn State University.

In his book, Mann warns that "public discourse has been polluted now for decades by corporate-funded disinformation – not just with climate change but with a host of health, environmental and societal threats." The implications for the planet are grim, he adds.

Mann became a target of climate deniers' hate because his research revealed there has been a recent increase of almost 1°C across the globe, a rise that was unprecedented "during at least the last 1,000 years" and which has been linked to rising emissions of carbon dioxide from cars, factories and power plants. Many other studies have since supported this finding although climate change deniers still reject his conclusions.

Mann's research particularly infuriated deniers after it was used prominently by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in one of its assessment reports, making him a target of right-wing denial campaigners. But as the 46-year-old scientist told the Observer, he only entered this research field by accident. "I was interested in variations in temperatures of the oceans over the past millennium. But there are no records of these changes so I had to find proxy measures: coral growth, ice cores and tree rings."

By studying these he could trace temperature fluctuations over the past 1,000 years, he realised. The result was a graph that showed small oscillations in temperature over that period until, about 150 years ago, there was a sudden jump, a clear indication that human activities were likely to be involved. A colleague suggested the graph looked like a hockey stick and the name stuck. The results of the study were published in Nature in 1998. Mann's life changed for ever.

"The trouble is that the hockey stick graph become an icon and deniers reckoned if they could smash the icon, the whole concept of global warming would be destroyed with it. Bring down Mike Mann and we can bring down the IPCC, they reckoned. It is a classic technique for the deniers' movement, I have discovered, and I don't mean only those who reject the idea of global warming but those who insist that smoking doesn't cause cancer or that industrial pollution isn't linked to acid rain."

A barrage of intimidation was generated by "a Potemkin village" of policy foundations, as Mann puts it. These groups were set up by privately-funded groups that included Koch Industries and Scaife Foundations and bore names such as the Cato Institute, Americans for Prosperity and the Heartland Institute. These groups bombarded Mann with freedom of information requests while the scientist was served with a subpoena by Republican congressman Joe Barton to provide access to his correspondence. The purported aim was to clarify issues. The real aim was to intimidate Mann.

In addition, Mann has been attacked by Ken Cuccinelli, the Republican attorney general of Virginia who has campaigned to have the scientist stripped of academic credentials. Several committees of inquiry have investigated Mann's work. All have exonerated him.

Thousands of emails have been sent to Mann, many deeply unpleasant. "You and your colleagues… ought to be shot, quartered and fed to the pigs along with your whole damn families," said one. "I was hopin [sic] I would see the news and you commited [sic] suicide," ran another.

Yet all that Mann had done was publish to a study suggesting, in cautious terms, that Earth had started to heat up unexpectedly in the past few decades.

"On one occasion, I had to call the FBI after I was sent an envelope with a powder in it," Mann adds. "It turned out to be cornmeal but again the aim was intimidation. I ended up with police security tape all over my office doors and windows. That is the life of a climate scientist today in the US."

Mann insists he will not give up. "I have a six-year-old daughter and she reminds me what we are fighting for." Indeed, Mann is generally optimistic that climate change deniers and their oil and coal industry backers have overstepped the mark and goaded scientists to take action. He points to a recent letter, signed by 250 members of the US National Academy of Science, including 11 Nobel laureates, and published in Science. The letter warns about the dangers of the current attacks on climate scientists and calls "for an end to McCarthy-like threats of criminal prosecution against our colleagues based on innuendo and guilt by association, the harassment of scientists by politicians seeking distractions to avoid taking action, and the outright lies being spread about them."

"Words like those give me hope," says Mann.

The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars will be published by Columbia University Press in April

==========================================================================================================

For the most part, the people attacking the science have about as much credibility as creationists do in the scientific community (none), and the idea we should treat deniers as "beyond reproach is laughable, particularly when there's stories like this out there. Sadly, from the level of discourse I've seen on so many issues, nothing claimed here would shock me if true. I read it with a bit of cynicism, but there's plenty of reason to believe that the threats and hate mail are real.

"Climategate" was nothing. That's been studied, torn apart, analyzed, and explained repeatedly. "Climategate 2.0" was also nothing. A rehash of the same quotemined emails presented out of context. The scientific community (with some detractors, as is always the case) overwhelmingly believes climate change - all climate change - to be a significant issue because it will have real impact on things like migration, food production, etc. And economically speaking, using resources more efficiently makes sense anyhow.

The suggestion I'm intransigent is without basis. I'll look at as much credible info as possible. I have a pretty moderate position, not the alarmism that's going nowhere fast, but the "hey, there's money to be made doing things differently, and the benefits are there, and if it turns out climate change wasn't accurately modeled, we'll still probably be better off" view.  The fact that there's so much propaganda out there to counter that sort of view, and the source of it to me is pretty clear, and that people blindly read nonsense spouted by people with no background in the actual science as though it has the same weight as science is the problem.

It's a tactic that's becoming common in political discourse of all sorts - shift debate from real issues to nonsensical noise, attack the sources knowing that the people who are watching aren't going to do their own research, marginalize the voices of reason, and then just dump as much money into the system to saturate civil society with the message, while real problems get ignored.

It's a sick, sad state of affairs.
 
Redeye said:
It's a tactic that's becoming common in political discourse of all sorts - shift debate from real issues to nonsensical noise, attack the sources knowing that the people who are watching aren't going to do their own research, marginalize the voices of reason, and then just dump as much money into the system to saturate civil society with the message, while real problems get ignored.

It's a sick, sad state of affairs.

That applies to both camps; I bet the same comment was made by some Romans a couple of thousand years ago...
 
Jungle said:
That applies to both camps; I bet the same comment was made by some Romans a couple of thousand years ago...

Sure. No argument there - but it seems more pervasive in one camp. And it's seeming to get a whole lot worse lately, but maybe that's just how I've been seeing things lately.
 
ouch . . .  this is going to hurt  when Ontario wakes up to the new green reality imposed on them and their wallets.

"The government has finally seen through the wind-farm scam – but why did it take them so long?

To the nearest whole number, the percentage of the world’s energy that comes from wind turbines today is: zero. Despite the regressive subsidy (pushing pensioners into fuel poverty while improving the wine cellars of grand estates), despite tearing rural communities apart, killing jobs, despoiling views, erecting pylons, felling forests, killing bats and eagles, causing industrial accidents, clogging motorways, polluting lakes in Inner Mongolia with the toxic and radioactive tailings from refining neodymium, a ton of which is in the average turbine — despite all this, the total energy generated each day by wind has yet to reach half a per cent worldwide."


http://www.thegwpf.org/opinion-pros-a-cons/5128-matt-ridley-the-winds-of-change.html
 
nothing like a good chuckle on a Monday morning.

"A team of Canadian climate scientists is predicting the widespread disappearance of outdoor hockey rinks across the country in the next 50 years due to global warming - with some regions of the sport's spiritual birthplace likely to witness an even earlier eclipse of old-time shinny on natural ice."

Remember back in 2000 when the British Climate "experts" claimed "Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past " ?

And the Australian Climate "experts" claimed the droughts were now permanent ?



http://www.ottawacitizen.com/travel/Final+buzzer+shinny+nears+climate+scientists+warn/6250192/story.html

 
Haletown said:
Remember back in 2000 when the British Climate "experts" claimed "Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past " ?

Yeah... I can confirm they were wrong. Here's my backyard last week:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

And we keep receiving snow almost everyday day. We are well into march, yet we still have minimums of -15 to -20.
 
and that damnable Arctic ocean just won't cooperate with the ever so smart computer models produced by the ever so smart climate scientists.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/05/19/sea-ice-news-call-for-arctic-sea-ice-forecasts-plus-forecast-poll/#more-40211


Since there has been so hyperventilating the last years about the polar bears dying off because the Arctic Ocean ice is melting, does this mean there will now be an explosion in the Polar bear population?

Think of all the poor seals that will now become polar  bear lunch.


Just asking.
 
There never was a polar bear extinction except in the minds of excitable and clever scam artists and advertizers who know that large, furry animals attract lots of sympathy (especially from people who have never been closer to a bear of any kind than the Toronto Zoo. Trust me, after being in the field in Gagetown and Petawawa I give bears a very wide berth, and these are much smaller and less agressive than their northern cousins!).

I thought the idea of Michael E. Mann calling foul was pretty hilarious. His so called "Hockey Stick" graph simply makes no sense given historical facts like the European War Period (when Vikings were farming in Greenland or Scots were making wine rather than scotch since the average temperature was warmer than today) and the Little Ice Age (when major European and North American rivers were frozen over), and of course he refused to publish the algorithms and data used to create the graph so other scientists could check the work or see if it could be duplicated (a process known in some circles as "Science")

The population of polar bears has been relatively steady or even climbing, which means that seals may not be the only thing on the menu given the expanded human presence up north...
 
Especially since they don't eat, except what they can scrounge, from about April to Sept.....human garbage dumps smell pretty good to a starving bear.....
 
Jungle said:
-24c this morning... PLEASE, bring on the warming !!
But...it is warming:  without all that carbon dioxide, it would be -26!  ;D
 
Cellulosic Ethanol Gets a $100 Million Boost

Virdia plans to make cheap sugars from wood chips, tackling the industry's greatest challenge.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 By Kevin Bullis
Article Link

Despite years of federal mandates, the cellulosic biofuels industry—which aims to make ethanol from wood chips and similar plant matter instead of corn—has yet to start commercial-scale production.

But the fledgling industry got some good news yesterday when Virdia, a company that converts cellulose into sugar, announced that it had raised over $100 million in private and public financing to go toward building its first commercial-scale plant. Converting cellulose to sugar is the most difficult part of making cellulosic biofuels. Once the sugars are produced, they can be converted to ethanol using the conventional process for making ethanol, which uses corn sugar.

Wood chips and other cellulosic materials have several advantages: they're abundant, they don't compete with food crops like corn, and they result in far lower carbon-dioxide emissions than corn ethanol.

Philippe Lavielle, Virdia's CEO, says the company's technology, when employed at a large scale, could make cellulosic sugars economically competitive with sugar made from corn. "A corn ethanol plant could use sugars from Virdia instead of corn sugar," he says.

Virdia, which until today was called HCL Cleantech, grinds up wood chips and cleans them to remove contaminants, then dissolves the cellulose and hemicellulose components with hydrochloric acid, in a process called acid hydrolysis. That leaves behind a brown powdery substance called lignin that can be used in wood pellet stoves, or could be used to make other fuels and useful chemicals.

Acid hydrolysis is an old process, but it has been too expensive to be used to produce cheap sugar. Virdia's key innovation is a proprietary process for inexpensively recycling the acid, which makes acid hydrolysis cheaper and cleaner. "The 70-year-old process never recycled hydrochloric acid, it just neutralized it. That made it uneconomical and difficult to justify environmentally, because it produced mountains of salt," Lavielle says.

The company says another advantage of its technology is that it produces more sugar per ton of biomass than conventional approaches, which typically rely on breaking cellulose down with enzymes. It produces between 95 and 97 percent of the theoretical maximum, compared to 75 to 80 percent with enzyme-based approaches, Lavielle says. "We get all the sugars out from brute-force engineering," he says.
More on link
 
much too funny . .

Step 1.  Check out this website

http://www.thearcticinstitute.org/p/staff.html

Very professional, web presence kudos, etc etc.


Step 2.  Check out the fisking of the Arctic Institute

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/04/sea-ice-news-volume-3-1-the-arctic-institute-pawns-itself/#comment-913834

a one room apartment in a bedbug infest building . . .  now that is a real Institute  :nod:



 
Not much depth of experience(ie in years) with the staff. Pretty easy on the eyes, though.  ;D
 
Lorne Gunter: For climate cues, look to the sun
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/03/07/lorne-gunter-for-climate-cues-look-to-the-sun/
Lorne Gunter  Mar 7, 2012

Ottawa’s giant skating rink on the Rideau Canal was closed in February due to thin ice caused by unseasonably mild temperatures. Yet, at the same time, ice blocked the canals of Venice for the first time in recent memory as temperatures in the exquisite Italian city dropped to -10C for more than a week. In the Netherlands, canals were closed to commercial boat traffic because ice made them unnavigable — another unusual development.

Also in early February, fountains in southern France froze over. Polish rail lines were chocked with metres of snow. Swiss villages were cut off by record accumulations this winter. In Japan, tens of thousands of residents were confined to their homes because there was too little removal equipment to clear all the white stuff. At one point three weeks ago, more than 140,000 people worldwide were reportedly stranded by snow.

So which is likely to be the new norm: North America’s mild winter, or Europe’s and Asia’s cold, snowy season?

To hear climate alarmists and environmentalists tell it, the world will soon be without winter. There will be no more backyard skating rinks or Arctic sea ice to sustain the polar bears. Snow will become a rarity in much of Europe, and tornados such as the ones that devastated large swaths of the American Midwest last weekend will become more commonplace.

But that’s not what some solar physicists are predicting.

Scientists who have made careers of studying the sun warn that our star is about to enter a less-active phase — a solar minimum that could last 30 years or longer. If that happens, some physicists see a worldwide return to the temperatures of the Little Ice Age (LIA). Not coincidentally, the deepest part of the LIA — during the late 17th century — was the last time our sun generated as few sunspots and as little geomagnetic activity as it appears set to generate for the next few decades.

Solid records of the connection between solar activity and Earth’s temperatures go back at least 300 years. If so-called proxy records are included — evidence from tree rings and ice-core samples, for instance — then the connection is thousands of years old.

The sun-temperature connection only makes sense. Which is warmer, summer or winter? Daytime or night? A sunny day or a cloudy one?

Sometimes I wonder whether our Neolithic ancestors understood better than modern climate alarmists what warmed the Earth. They didn’t build monuments that marked the summer and winter solstices because they worried the soot from their cooking fires was dangerously warming the planet. They built Stonehenge and the Goseck Circle and others to ensure the declining sun of winter would come back and prompt the return of spring and the plants and animals they relied on for their subsistence.

For years, now, the global-warming establishment has tried to minimize the effects the sun has on weather and climate. For instance, rough drafts of the UN’s next five-year report on climate change (which are already circulating) apparently devote just a single sentence to the sun’s role as a “driver” of temperatures on Earth, while page after page after page obsesses on the carbon-dioxide-temperature theory.

The fact is, scientists have studied the sun so thoroughly for so long that they can forecast with about 85% confidence what will happen to our temperatures if the number of sunspots rises or lowers from one cycle to the next and if the sun’s geomagnetic activity strengthens or weakens. They even know the effect on temperatures if one solar cycle — typically about 11 years — is longer or shorter than the cycle before it. And by studying the forces at work deep inside the sun, they can estimate with accuracy the length of the next cycle or two. This gives them a good idea of the sun’s influence on climate for the next few decades.

According to a recent study by three Norwegian scientists — Jan-Erik Solheim, Kjell Stordahl and Ole Humlum — the sun’s current cycle has lasted so long that the next, due to begin any time now, will see a decline in temperatures of 0.63C. And that cycle is expected to last so long that the cycle after that will witness a temperature drop of 0.95C.

Given that the planet has warmed only about 0.7C or 0.8C over the past century, that means all the warming Earth has experienced since 1900 could be wiped out in the next solar cycle, and in the cycle after that temperatures could retreat to levels not seen since the 18th century.

Start idling your full-sized SUVs in your driveways now. The planet may need all the global warming it can get.
 
The Gaia fantasy land lives large in America.

"The U.S. government last year announced a $10 million award, dubbed the “L Prize,” for any manufacturer that could create a “green” but affordable light bulb.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu said the prize would spur industry to offer the costly bulbs, known as LEDs, at prices “affordable for American families.” There was also a “Buy America” component. Portions of the bulb would have to be made in the United States."


The winning company was announced and their eco  greenie gaia friendly bulb retails for  $50.00 each.


That is soooooooooo affordable.  ;D

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/government-subsidized-green-light-bulb-carries-costly-price-tag/2012/03/07/gIQAFxOD0R_story.html



 
Back
Top