Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Spiegel does 8 part series on current state of climate research
Wattsupwiththat.com ^ | April 2, 2010 | Anthony Watts

Posted on 04/03/2010 9:31:36 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

This series features Steve McIntyre prominently, and well worth the read. See the series links below:

James Delingpole quips in the Telegraph:When the Germans give up on AGW you really do know it’s all over…


(Excerpt) Read more at wattsupwiththat.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Conspiracy; Science; Weather
KEYWORDS: climatechange; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; globalwarmingscandal; ipcc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

1 posted on 04/03/2010 9:31:37 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All
John Wright (19:35:41) :

This: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,druck-686697,00.html gives you the printable version of all eight parts.


2 posted on 04/03/2010 9:33:36 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; Marine_Uncle; Fred Nerks; steelyourfaith; NormsRevenge; onyx; BOBTHENAILER; ...

fyi


3 posted on 04/03/2010 9:36:15 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; Marine_Uncle; Fred Nerks; steelyourfaith; NormsRevenge; onyx; BOBTHENAILER; ...
This is a Major happening!
4 posted on 04/03/2010 9:37:46 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

WOW! Nicely done. Thank you!


5 posted on 04/03/2010 9:39:04 AM PDT by onyx (Facts don't matter. Proof not required. Anything goes! Racial slurs, death threats.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Amagi; Beowulf; Tunehead54; Clive; Fractal Trader; tubebender; marvlus; ...
Thanx !

 


Beam me to Planet Gore !

6 posted on 04/03/2010 9:40:22 AM PDT by steelyourfaith (Warmists as "traffic light" apocalyptics: "Greens too yellow to admit they're really Reds."-Monckton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Hadn't seen this one before:

From Part 4: The Smoking Gun of Climatology

*********************************EXCERPT*****************************************

Curious Inconsistencies

The Jones team attributes another sudden jump in temperature readings to the decline in air pollution since the 1970s as a result of stricter emissions laws. Particles suspended in the air block solar radiation, so that temperatures rise when the air becomes cleaner. Air pollution in the south has always been much lower than in the north, because, as Webster explains, "there is less land and therefore less industry in the Southern Hemisphere."

Oddly enough, however, the temperature increase in the south is just as strong as it is in the north. "That isn't really possible," says Webster.

7 posted on 04/03/2010 9:49:33 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

.


8 posted on 04/03/2010 10:09:41 AM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: All
I agree with this comment from WUWT:

***************************************

Tor Hansson

The most schizophrenic article I have read in a long time.

The sky is still falling, sort of, only not in the scientific areas that can be checked with empirical data. It’s holding up OK there.

So relax, the alarmists were mostly wrong, except when they tell us that things are getting really bad soon, and that there will be palm trees on Helgoland.

It is getting closer to a reasonable narrative. Still a ways to go.

9 posted on 04/03/2010 10:14:49 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: All
And this comment:

*******************************************************

KBK

“It will become more arid, however, in many subtropical regions. Industrialized nations, which bear the greatest culpability for global warming, will be most heavily affected.”

It was pretty even-handed until page 7. Then it became apparent that even though the entire foundation has vanished, the authors believe the house is still standing.

10 posted on 04/03/2010 10:18:03 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

From my comment on an earlier thread;
<
“Despite the controversy, most climatologists agree that in the end the general view of climate change will not have changed significantly. Almost all share the basic conviction that we are headed for warmer times.”

“There are various pieces of indirect evidence that support the theory of global warming. Glaciers are receding, sea levels are rising and sea ice in the Arctic regions is disappearing. “

“Other central predictions of climatologists, such as that involving a noticeable rise in sea levels, would also have to be reevaluated. How high sea levels will go in the future is already a matter of debate.”

“On the other hand, hardly any glaciologists doubt that sea levels will be significantly higher along coastlines by the end of the century.”

“Another effect that is not as easy to calculate is the melting of mountain glaciers and inland ice in Greenland and Antarctica. Most of the melting today is happening in mountain glaciers, from the Andes to the Himalayas.”

“Glaciologists speculate that parts of the Western Antarctic and, to a greater extent, Greenland, are melting more quickly than initially assumed.”

“Despite the enormous uncertainties, there is agreement on at least one issue: Global warming can no longer be stopped.”

“Even if humanity were to stop burning coal, oil and natural gas immediately, there would still be a moderate temperature increase in the next two to three decades. This is because the planetary weather system reacts with a certain delay to the greenhouse gases that have already been emitted into the atmosphere.”

“But no, he adds, he happens to be someone who has acquired inside knowledge about a looming disaster, knowledge that he cannot keep to himself. “If I’m a passenger on a ship and I see, through my binoculars, that we’re headed for an iceberg,” says Schellnhuber, “I have to warn the captain immediately.”

” it isn’t about stopping a luxury ocean liner, but about the massive effort that is required to end the age of oil and coal as quickly as possible.”

As I said, it’s an improvement for Der Spiegel, but still takes one thing for granted; That it’s all man’s fault>
I suggest that interested FReepers read through the comments at WUWT, they explain my position better than I can.


11 posted on 04/03/2010 10:19:25 AM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Waitaminnit. Didn’t Der Spiegel post some drivel that if the world didn’t pass Crap and Tax that the oceans would start boiling a few months back?


12 posted on 04/03/2010 10:30:48 AM PDT by Post Toasties
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra
They have (der Spiegel ) been forced into putting out this article...but they still BELIEVE...

************************************EXCERPT********************************************

A Tangent...picked this up from a comment...

Stephan

I think Steve Mc has come up with a huge one as well apparently could be more damaging for UEA than climategate
http://climateaudit.org/2010/04/02/keith-should-say/#more-10626

13 posted on 04/03/2010 10:31:29 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All
From comments at ClimateAudit article just above...we have this link:

The climate change game … Monopoly: the IPCC version

*********************************EXCERPT**************************************************

MBH, for any newcomers to the “climate wars”, is the scientists’ acronym for the notoriously iconic “hockey stick” team papers. But, there you have it, folks, the much vaunted IPCC “peer-review” process in action. Briffa, btw, was a “Lead Author” on Chapter 6; and among the “scientific” papers discussed were not only his own, but those of Wahl (and his buddy Caspar Amman). As far as I can tell, these “Lead Authors” get the final word on what appears in the Assessment Reports (and perhaps the “Synthesis” report, and/or the “Summary for Policymakers” …. which – apart from very carefully crafted Press Releases – is probably the most many will ever read. But they know that. In fact, they seem to count on it. It might even be one of the IPCC’s unwritten “principles”.

IOW, once the Reviewer Comments have been compiled at IPCC HQ, courtesy of the “Technical Support Unit” (TSU), the work of deciding the worthiness the Comments is divied up amongst the lead authors (who are instructed not to include their names in their judicious application of “Accepted”, “Rejected”, “Noted” etc. because “responses to the comments should represent the entire chapter team”).

In case you’re wondering how I know this, I found it in the Climategate files, in a document called AR4SOR_BatchAB_Ch06-KRB-1stAug.doc. This 1stAug. date strongly suggests that Briffa completed this document after receiving Wahl’s July 21 helpful input.

I’ll try to be as brief as possible in highlighting the implications of all this – with the benefit of insight. Perhaps part of the problem is best illustrated by two comments from Steve McIntyre (and the “chapter team” responses thereto), as part of his review of the “Second Order Draft of Chapter 6″, that appears in the document Briffa had sent to Wahl:

[Comment No. 6-1114 No specified page or line]:

As a matter of prudence, it seems risky to me for IPCC to permit section lead authors to publicize and rely heavily on their own work, especially when the ink is barely dry on the work. In particular, Osborn and Briffa 2006, which is by one of the section lead authors, was published only in February 2006 and is presented in the Second Order Draft without even being presented in the First Order Draft. Nonetheless, it has been relied on to construct the important Box 6.4 Figure 1. This is risky. Osborn and Briffa 2006 uses some very questionable proxies, including the infamous Mann PC1. I have also been unable to verify some of the claimed correlations to gridcell temperature. One of the authors’ excuses is that they incorrectly cited the HadCRU2 temperature data set, while they actually used the CRUTEM2 data set and that the some of the HadCRU2 data was spurious. This hardly gives grounds for comfort. The point made in Box 6.4 Figure 1 is also argumentative. If the relative warmth of MWP and modern periods is inessential to any conclusions reached by IPCC, I would urge you to delete this Figure and related commentary. [Stephen McIntyre (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 309-11)]

The “chapter team’s” response:

“Noted. MWP figure changed. Although much of the claims in the comment concerning the proxies are not share, (sic) we have chosen to change the figure somewhat to reduce reliance on a specific paper.”

From where I’m sitting, I’d say that the “chapter team” succeeded in missing the point by a country mile. Surely they deserve to draw a “Go directly to jail … and do not collect $200″ card. Conflict of interest must be an entirely foreign concept to these “climate scientists”.

14 posted on 04/03/2010 10:53:11 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Post Toasties

That was part of the previous propaganda machine publication....they are now backtracking a bit....but still intend to go in the same direction.


15 posted on 04/03/2010 10:55:29 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: All
Climatedepot headline of the article:

http://www.climatedepot.com/

******************************************************

Der Spiegel: 'An Entire Branch of Science in Crisis': 'IPCC has experienced a dramatic fall from grace...more and more mistakes, evidence of sloppy work and exaggerations'


16 posted on 04/03/2010 12:34:53 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
At least Europe is now getting a better view as how this whole fabricated global warming scam has come about. When once supporters on the far left start to question what the hell they have been feed, things are improving a bit.
Now where are the US alphabets. Their scared shitless to expose the hoax.
17 posted on 04/03/2010 6:24:20 PM PDT by Marine_Uncle (Honor must be earned....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
An observation I would like to pick out regarding chapter four, where professor Storch says the following:
"German climatologist Hans von Storch now wants to see an independent institution recalculate the temperature curve, and he even suggests that the skeptics be involved in the project. He points out, however, that processing the data will take several years.

"There is no other way to regain the trust that has been lost," he says, "even if I'm certain that the new curve will not look significantly different from the old one."

And if it does? "That would definitely be the worst-case scenario for climatology. We would have to start all over again."

BINGO!
This is the problem with this whole gang Storch has been a frigen part of for many years.... They can only believe the earth is warming due to AGW theories.... The clowns supposedly deeply involved in all facets of scientific endeavor as part of what is known as climatology cannot for some reason accept the fact the earth may simply cool and warm based on natural phenomena.. Here lies their fundamental problem.
18 posted on 04/03/2010 7:02:04 PM PDT by Marine_Uncle (Honor must be earned....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
If the most current projections hold true and we are in for about twenty to thirty years of global cooling.... Storch and his gang will see just how tough it gets when one experiences ever longer cold autumns, snows, cold rains, dense fog in European coastal areas and interiors... then prolonged cold often very snowy and vicious cold snaps lasting weeks and greater on end....followed by what they consider abnormal cold springs... hardly any real prolonged heat waves during shortened summers...come to past.
He and others most probably already secretly understand the possibilities of this coming to past. They just cannot let their national newspapers get carried away....

By the way. If Storch according to the article is a primary contributor to the current climate models then he should be in the witness stand alongside Jones, Hanson and a host of others for not being to bright in the reality of things.

And quite frankly I am a bit saddened that it may be remotely possible many of them did want to present good modeling techniques within their sphere of knowledge.
But as we have found in recent times... even the best modeling along the lines most of them most probably have followed is simply not sufficient to take in the very complicated set of conditions. Very complicated stuff. And it has nothing to do in a given degree to the total power of a given super computer to crank out realistic information.
One could let a given system run for a year making sure it never crashed ..... the problem is they simply are not feeding in the correct data into a set of robust (accurate) models that actually can model a closer to accurate scenario of how the total atmosphere and ocean/land mass operate regarding warming/cooling.
They all would had been better off admitting we are many years away at best at reaching some level of modeling that really could be potentially relied on to forecast future climate/weather changes, assuming to a degree more accurate and honest temperature (and other measurements) would be forced on the whole to provide more accurate raw data.
But no. They continue to be what I would describe as horse's asses.
19 posted on 04/03/2010 7:47:03 PM PDT by Marine_Uncle (Honor must be earned....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

There are 10,000 lies told by just as many scientists and reporters that are really activists.

They are at least acknowledging there is a problem, but they can’t dig themselves out from the mountain of lies they are under.

They still think that global warming is beyond dispute, but it may not be as disastrous as the alarmists say.

They go on and on about their little climate models as if they can predict anything and if they could, it would actually qualify as scientific evidence.

Nice try Spiegal, but you’re going to have to work a little harder than that.

The snake pit they’ve fallen into is deeper than they want to admit, it’s already partly consumed them.


20 posted on 04/03/2010 8:11:23 PM PDT by Brett66 (Where government advances, and it advances relentlessly , freedom is imperiled -Janice Rogers Brown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson