Deniergate: Turning the tables on climate sceptics ( Really?)

New Scientist ^ | 15:54 14 December 2009 | Michael Marshall and Michael Le Page

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

"Climategate" has put scientists on trial in the court of public opinion. If you believe climate sceptics, a huge body of evidence involving the work of tens of thousands of scientists over more than a century should be thrown out on the basis of the alleged misconduct of a handful of researchers, even though nothing in the hacked emails has been shown to undermine any of the scientific conclusions.

If we are going to judge the truth of claims on the behaviour of those making them, it seems only fair to look at the behaviour of a few of those questioning the scientific consensus. There are many similar examples we did not include. We leave readers to draw their own conclusions about who to trust.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Here's the thread I wanted:

Smoking Guns Across Australia: Where’s the warming? Looking at 16 other locations.

The article is from the JoNova website....

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

See #20.

[GeronL]

There was a story about a conference on the need for eugenics in 1939. It was on the front page of the NY Times.

It was about “saving the human race”. An emergency, a crisis... immediate action needed... blah blah blah

same ol same ol

[a fool in paradise]

ZPG (Zero Population Growth) has been pushed since Earth Day (honor of Lenin’s 100th birthday) and even now there are members of the Obama administration that urge adoption of China’s one child policy. There is no “choice” in forced abortions.

[saganite]

Thanks for referring me to that thread. It’s obvious the data has been tampered with but all we seem to hear about is the E-mails. That’s handy for the defenders of those scientists because it’s easier to explain away the comments in them and much easier for the media to slant. Analyzing the actual data, on the other hand, is beyond the ability of the general public to understand and so it remains the unreported story.

[twistedwrench]

Hundreds protest globull warming

[Lee'sGhost]

I’d love to have an ecopy of Micheal Creighton’s book (was it Next?) where he compares Global warming hoax to eugenics. It should be repeated over and over.

[GeronL]

and now I can’t find it. lol.

[Plutarch]

Wouldn’t we be able to tell how much C02 in the atmosphere is natural vs. man made based on the ratio of isotopes such as C14?

[GeronL]

It won’t be zero growth it will be negative growth the most radical among them want to see a quarter-billion humans and thats it.

Talk about genocide on a massive scale.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

ROFL...love that....

[danielmryan]

Thus speaketh the New Lobbyist.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Anybody funding that research?

[meadsjn]

... genocide on a massive scale.

That's the objective of all environmentalists.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

And this was posted yesterday:

Now the Russians confirm that UK climate scientists manipulated data to exaggerate global warming

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

I think there is a thread about some funny business with climate data in New Zealand also....

[Plutarch]

Anybody funding that research?

I've been Googling a bit. The isotope ratios C12/C13, etc. are used to differentiate between CO2 from fossil fuels and naturally existing in air.

Carbon Dioxide in Air: Isotopes of CO2 in air

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Author of this article is from New Zealand...FR Thread:

CLIMATE STATEMENT "AN ORCHESTRATED LITANY OF LIES" ( Dr Vincent Gray )

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

The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition ^ | 15th July 2008 | Dr Vincent Gray

Posted on Mon 14 Dec 2009 09:27:28 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach

CLIMATE STATEMENT "AN ORCHESTRATED LITANY OF LIES"

Veteran Wellington climate consultant, Dr Vincent Gray, expert reviewer of all four IPCC Assessment Reports, explains why he has resigned his longtime membership of the Royal Society of New Zealand in protest at the inaccuracies in a report on climate change issued on 12 July by the Society's Climate Committee.

COMMENTS ON THE RECENT STATEMENT BY THE CLIMATE

COMMITTEE OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF NEW ZEALAND

 

Dr Vincent Gray

INTRODUCTION

As an Expert Reviewer for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for eighteen years, that is to say, from the very beginning. I have submitted thousands of comments to all of the Reports. My comments on the Fourth IPCC Report, all 1,898 of them, are to be found at IPCC (2007) and  my opinions of the IPCC are in Gray (2008b)

I am therefore very familiar with the arguments presented by the IPCC, many of which have now been copied by the Royal Society of New Zealand, and the responses to them.

I will first comment on the Introduction

to make absolutely clear what the evidence is for climate change and anthropogenic (human-induced) causes.

The climate has always changed and always will. No evidence whatsoever for a human contribution to the climate is given in their following statement.

Their Summary is as follows:

The globe is warming

This statement is a lie. The globe is currently cooling. According to the CSSP Report (Karl et al 2007), there are currently nine authorities currently involved in providing a dataset of monthly global temperature anomalies. They are

NOAA’s National Climate Data Center (NCDC, GHCN-COADS)
NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS)
Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia (HadCRUT2v)
NOAA radiosonde network ,  (RATPAC)
Hadley Centre Radiosonde Network (HadAT2)
University of Alabama  Lower Troposphere TLT  MSU  (UAH )
Remote Sensing Systems Lower Troposphere TLT MSU (RSS)
National Center for Environmental Protection Reanalysis (NCEP50)
European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts  Reanalysis  (ERA40)                                                                                                                   

Eight of these authorities agree that the globe is currently cooling. Only GISS disagrees.

because of increasing greenhouse gas emissions

No evidence is presented to justify this conclusion. There are “projections” of computer models but these are not predictions, they are merely the results of assumptions made in the model. No “projected” result has ever been successfully related to an actual change in the climate.

Measurements show that greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere
are well above levels seen for many thousands of years.

This statement is a lie. 90,000 measurements published in peer-reviewed journals since 1850, some by Nobel Prize-winners, have been suppressed by the IPCC because they do not agree with this statement. (Beck 2007). Stability of carbon dioxide in ice cores thousands of years old is questionable. (Jaworowski 2007).  Recent measurements of carbon dioxide are confined only to exceptional circumstances over the ocean, and do not include measurements over land. (Manning et al 1994).

[steelyourfaith]

LOL

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

A new thread:

More Evidence That Sun Is Climate Key, Not Human CO2

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Another thread of interest:

Sarah Palin Responds: On Climate Change And Her WaPost Op-Ed