With US federal expenditure on climate-related research over $5billion annually and hundreds of billions in “rents” to corporations pushing alarmist schemes the potentially corrupting factor of money cannot be ignored. Read more here.
Opinion
Valuing Passion Over Wisdom: Hansen Awarded Highest Honour by American Meteorologists
THE director of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies, James Hansen, was awarded the 2009 Carl-Gustaf Rossby Medal in Phoenix yesterday. This is the highest honour bestowed by the American Meteorological Society and was awarded for Dr Hansen’s outstanding contributions to climate modelling, understanding climate change forcings and sensitivity, and for clear communication of climate science in the public arena.
Dr Hansen is passionate about global warming and quick to give advice and offer support to those who champion the idea that there is an urgent need for a global reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. He has been an advisor to Al Gore and flown to the UK to testify in support of Greenpeace activists on trial for criminal damage to a coal-fired power station.
There is, however, nothing charitable or thoughtful in Dr Hansen’s approach to controversy. He has only contempt for so-called climate change sceptics claiming they operate like tobacco scientists and he has suggested that CEOs of fossil energy companies should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature.[1]
Claims of Data ‘Massaging’ at NASA
DATA on global temperatures is compiled by several organisation including NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) headed by James Hansen. This data set tends to show more warming than, for example, data compiled by the UK Meteorology Bureau’s Hadley Centre. Both rely on measurements from thermometers.
All sorts of statistical tests can be performed on data – on numbers. There is even a test to determine whether data is likely to have been ‘massaged’ by people.
Ecologist and computer modeller David Stockwell has used this technique to analyse the frequency of the final digits in the temperature data compiled by James Hansen’s team, and he claims that the unequal distribution of the individual digits strongly suggests manipulation. Read more here.
Physicist Lubos Motl agrees. Statitician Steve McIntyre disagrees.
Maintaining a Monopoly on Climate Science
LEVELS of atmospheric carbon dioxide have been steadily rising, but since about 1998 global warming has stalled. Some climate scientists claim the reason has everything to do with the sun.
A little over a month ago a planning meeting was called to discuss whether more research should be undertaken by the US National Academy of Sciences/US National Research Council in particular to consider the role of solar forcing on climate.
Well known meteorologist and blogger Roger Pielke (Sr) was at the meeting and claims that compelling evidence was present showing that current climate models do not adequately represent the solar influence on climate.
[Read more…] about Maintaining a Monopoly on Climate Science
The IPCC Can’t Count – Author and Reviewer Numbers are Wrong
HOW many times have you heard or read words to the effect that 4000 scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change (IPCC) supported the claims about a significant human influence on climate? I think I’ve seen it on television, radio and the Internet and I know that politicians at national levels have quoted such figures. There’s no question whatsoever. It’s utterly wrong.
In fact, once the duplicated names are removed that number falls below 2,900 and if we only want those who explicitly supported the claims it falls to only about 60. So how does 4,000 become 60? Let’s take a closer look at the real numbers.
Consider the statement “The IPCC report concluded that there is a human influence on climate. This was supported by almost 4,000 authors and reviewers.” The popular mythology – and one that IPCC never tries to correct – is that those 4,000 supported the findings but all they really supported, by their work, was the creation of the report. The IPCC is allowing, or perhaps even encouraging, an ambiguity be misinterpreted, and not for the first time either, but I digress.
But how many individuals were involved? Was it 4,000 or some other number?
[Read more…] about The IPCC Can’t Count – Author and Reviewer Numbers are Wrong
Two Critiques on Climate Data
Dear Jennifer,
Critique of David Jones article Hot n dry Future Melbourne piece in The Age 6 Oct.
http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/?p=195
Also I note you posting using the RSS satellite data, I know the warmers pref this to UAH and always scream about the UAH data yet according to Fred Singer and others it is the RSS LT data that needs a correction. see
http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/?p=196
All the best,
Warwick
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD has worked in industry and government. She is currently researching a novel technique for long-range weather forecasting funded by the B. Macfie Family Foundation.