Unsettled Climate

A guest post at Watts Up With That

Originally blogged at Realclimategate

Judith Curry has tackled the ‘Hide the Decline’ issue at her blog Climate Etc.  The issue is that data was hidden from policymakers  (and the public) so as to present a ‘simpler’ message… and other data spliced in to perhaps give a very different message?

Remember it is all about the idea of ‘unprecedented’ global warming because the politicians, media and public were warned by graphs like this….

Tree ring data – Thermometers spliced in – tree ring data truncated

Tree Ring Data alone – with deleted data reinstated

In the video link (30 mins in ) in Judith Curry’s article the second graph is how ‘all scientists at Berkeley’ would present the data.  The whole video is well worth watching.

Continue reading →

Originally a guest post at Watts Up With That

Originally blogged at Realclimategate

The Carbon Brief is a new website  designed to provide a rapid response to any climate chaage related stories in the media.

It is also appears to be intended as a resource for articles and it claims to be an independent mediator between journalists and climate scientists.

The Carbon Brief’s twitter followers seem to have different expectations.

Andrew SimmsNef Bio: 10:10 Campaign Board Member, New Economic Foundation (NEF), Greenpeace UK board member, co-author of The Green Deal Report, founder of the 100 Month initiative, Trustee of TERI Europe(alongside Rajendra Pachauri, Sir John Houghton and Sir Crispin Tickell)

The Carbon Brief seems particularly concerned about how sceptical stories in UK media and blogs are being received by people in India and China and reported in non-EU countries media and blogs. (my bold).

“The media has a huge impact on the way that the climate debate has taken shape in the UK, as it has in the US, Australia and around the world. Comment articles in newspapers and blogs here are often copied and published thousands of times around the globe. The arguments fomented in the pages of The Guardian or the Daily Telegraph can have a significant impact on how climate change is reported in India and China.” – The Carbon Brief

On further investigation, the website demonstrates that they appear to be nothing but advocates of consensus climate change policy.  A look at their further resources  page gives the first two links as the Climate Science Rapid Response Team and RealClimate and it also include Climate Progress. There are no sceptical or even lukewarm website or blog links of any kind.

“Our team of researchers will provide a rapid response service for climate science stories. We go straight to peer-reviewed science and the relevant scientists to get their opinions” – The Carbon Brief

The Carbon Brief appears to have been set up for the specific purpose of countering sceptical stories relating to ‘climate change’ by going to AGW consensus  scientific sources for an instant rebuttal.  It is a project of the Energy and Strategy Centre, funded and supported by the European Climate Foundation (ECF)

ECF describes itself as “the largest philanthropic organisation in Europe focused on influencing government policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”. –The Carbon Brief

“…. To meet that challenge, six funding partners joined forces in 2007 to create a new multi-million euro philanthropic entity called the European Climate Foundation.”  – About Us –  ECF 

On the The Carbon Brief website they say they are just getting started.
Continue reading →

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!

Updates added:

I am both angered and saddened.

It was no doubt just a throwaway comment, with little thought behind it.

When Michael Buerk the presenter of the BBC radio program the ‘Moral Maze’ said in his intro to a debate about Multiculturalism in the UK: BBC iPlayer link (20 seconds in)

“not long ago to question multiculturalism…. 

….risked being branded racists and pushed into the loathesome corner with paedophiles and climate change deniers“

am I being too sensitive?

I presume that they mean ‘man made climate change deniers’, as I know of no-one that denies natural climate change, yet the words are used interchangeably.

To many people this would be a ‘climate change denier’ blog, what ever that may mean, should I be concerned for my personal safety?

I’m just sceptical of the catastrophic, End of the World’ cult like, gloom and doom version of Anthroprogenic Global Warming. (10:10, Greenpeace, Gore, WWF, Transition Towns, etc)
Continue reading →

Originally blogged at Realclimategate

It has all kicked off today at Climate Audit where Ryan O’Donnell is very annoyed…

………in  blog articles titled Steig’s Trick and  Coffin, meet nail.

All about the Steig, Mann et al paper that generated a Nature front page and world wide alarmism that the Antarctic was suffering man made global warming.

Some sceptical people thought that they had got their maths wrong and decided to publish paper to show how the statitistics should be done, thus improving the science.

There then follows a long tail.
Continue reading →

Originally a guest post of mine at Watts Up With That

It is my opinion that the BBC in broadcasting BBC 2 Horizon program ‘Science Under Attack’ did not treat the general public in the UK and at least one of the interviewees in the ‘good faith’ that they should be able to expect from the BBC. After the program aired, I contacted James Delingpole, who was one of the sceptics portrayed in the program and he told me how he was approached to participate by the BBC.

“I am making a film for BBC’s Horizon on public trust in science and I was hoping you may be able to help.”  – BBC Producer

However, the programs underlying message to the general public came across to me as that climate science was under attack by climate sceptics or deniers of science who are on a par with those that deny Aids, vaccines and extreme anti GM environmentalist activists.

Yet, in discussion with a NASA scientist, the presenter Professor Paul Nurse apparently makes a gross factual error informing the viewer that annual man-made CO2 emissions are;

seven times

that of the total natural annual emissions. This raised a number of eyebrows and is now subject to some discussion amongst the blogs, including at Bishop Hill.
Continue reading →

This should be interesting a workshop to be held with pro and sceptical scientists and contributors in Lisbon: (Update: full list of atendees added)

Anthony Watts can’t make it but has delegated Steven Mosher in his stead (co author – Climategate – The Crutape Letters – Mosher/Fuller. I would also recommend Fred Pearce’s book – The Climate Files (a warmer view 😉 )
Continue reading →

Originally blogged at Realclimategate

Well it looks like the BBC have learned very little this year and the response to this program should be interesting. There are more than enough journalists/ news editors around that are very aware of the issues that were glossed over and waved away..

The Professor spoke to Phil Jones, as the enquiries that he said had exonerated everybody, failed to ask a key questions… Could he have perhaps actually have asked Phil Jones.

Why did you ask colleagues to delete emails relating to the IPCC process? And, why did you feel the need to ask?

Continue reading →

Originally blogged at Realclimategate

In the Guardian – Germaine Greer writes an excellent article about the causes of the Brisbane flooding and the failures of the public and local government (covered up warnings)  to do anything about it when they were forewarned.

Basically an entirely predicted La Nina event, an example of weather not climate

Meteorologists warned Australians six months ago to prepare for a soaking. And nobody did a thing …

Guardian:  Australian Floods: Why were we so surprised? by Germaine Greer

Continue reading →

Originally blogged at Realclimategate

Note – I’m away for a couple of days, I doubt that I will have much opportunity to review and approve any new comments.

I came across Sourcewatch a little while ago.

If you were to also take a brief look at it’s global warming, climate change and climate skeptic section it will become quite clear what the contributors thoughts are  about ‘climate skeptics’. After browsing for a while I then considered:

Who and what is the climate skeptic section intended for?

Continue reading →