Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
People are looking into that "Harry" text file; Harry is a programmer tasked with making sense of a KEY DB on temperature data.
A very detailed article, from CBS no less.
The author goes into some very troubling detail of that Harry_txt file.
This is what is so amusing about some of this. For instance this:
Quote:
The leaked documents (see our previous coverage (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/21/ap/world/main5727910.shtml - broken link)) come from the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in eastern England. In global warming circles, the CRU wields outsize influence: it claims the world's largest temperature data set, and its work and mathematical models were incorporated into the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's 2007 report. That report, in turn, is what the Environmental Protection Agency acknowledged (http://epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment/downloads/EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0171-0001.pdf - broken link) it "relies on most heavily" when concluding that carbon dioxide emissions endanger public health and should be regulated.
Steve McIntyre had sent requests to the EPA at the time of that announcement on how they established this source as the key to their position when in fact according to their policy, it is required that all research be available for evaluation. That is, he was interested to know how they were able to come to their conclusions on the validity of the source when CRU was not releasing any of its data.
Just more evidence of the problems with this entire issue. Personally, I wish a hacker would expose the EPA for its poor work as it is no doubt just as corrupt and incompetent as the CRU has been in its approach.
"Global warming appears to have stalled. Climatologists are puzzled as to why average global temperatures have stopped rising over the last 10 years. Some attribute the trend to a lack of sunspots, while others explain it through ocean currents.
At least the weather in Copenhagen is likely to be cooperating. The Danish Meteorological Institute predicts that temperatures in December, when the city will host the United Nations Climate Change Conference, will be one degree above the long-term average.
Otherwise, however, not much is happening with global warming at the moment. The Earth's average temperatures have stopped climbing since the beginning of the millennium, and it even looks as though global warming could come to a standstill this year.
Ironically, climate change appears to have stalled in the run-up to the upcoming world summit in the Danish capital, where thousands of politicians, bureaucrats, scientists, business leaders and environmental activists plan to negotiate a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Billions of euros are at stake in the negotiations."
"But a few scientists simply refuse to believe the British calculations. "Warming has continued in the last few years," says Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK). However, Rahmstorf is more or less alone in his view. Hamburg Max Planck Institute scientist Jochem Marotzke, on the other hand, says: "I hardly know any colleagues who would deny that it hasn't gotten warmer in recent years."
The controversy sends confusing and mixed messages to the lay public. Why is there such a vigorous debate over climate change, even though it isn't getting warmer at the moment? And how can it be that scientists cannot even arrive at a consensus on changes in temperatures, even though temperatures are constantly being measured?
The global temperature-monitoring network consists of 517 weather stations. But each reading is only a tiny dot on the big world map, and it has to be extrapolated to the entire region with the help of supercomputers. Besides, there are still many blind spots, the largest being the Arctic, where there are only about 20 measuring stations to cover a vast area. Climatologists refer to the problem as the "Arctic hole.""
Exactly, and I don't think people blowing this off understand how significant the surface records were concerning their case, nor how important CRU was concerning the whole issue to that case.
Remember the constant excuse concerning US surface stations having CRN ratings far below accepted standards? Remember how they would always say "well, that's just the US, the global temp is what matters", well... this turns the "global temp" position right on its head.
What is said though as some have mentioned is that due to such poor management of the records and stations, the data for the entire records may be absolutely worthless. Talk about a real travesty.
Normander, this is a great point! We know that the USA surface temp record is suspect. Now we have ample evidence that England/Australia and Canada were as well.
I just read that CBS article and they got it about right. One of the points made is that CRU is the "Pentagon of Climate Research" and these leaked papers are equivalent to the "pentagon papers.
There is no way to over state who the players here are. They are the drivers of the IPCC report on climate change.
These are the main scientists that global governments turn to prove the AGW.
They are trying to suppress it and using every angle to do so, but as has been discussed here, the evidence is not simply speculative context of emails (which aren't as speculative as some like to suggest), but rather the actual data which validates much of the intent to which the e-mails hold.
This won't go away and the major news organizations will be forced to report on it or risk having their bias exposed directly and implicate them indirectly as a a part of the agenda based fraud (as is being shown with NYT at the moment).
I certainly hope you're right about this. But this assumes that enough people care about exposing their bias or even consider their bias an issue to make anything significant happen. That I'm not at all sure about.
As Sanrene said, GW has become a world-wide religion. The mindless followers of it thrive on leftist bias and would be crushed if it ever changed. Yes, in a sane world big things would happen and heads would roll. But the fact that this nonsense has gone on to the extent it has - for as long as it has - reminds us that it is not a sane world. There are too many..well..shall we say mentally challenged..out there to be able to safely predict logical outcomes.
Again, I clearly want what you want here. It's just that my confidence in the common sense of the masses of my fellow man has dwindled over the years to near zero. I hope I'm pleasantly surprised.
Last edited by CrownVic95; 11-24-2009 at 03:57 PM..
The last two days, Yahoo's front page has had pictures of icebergs. The article attributes them to GW. Three days ago the story was also GW. That article talked about the dire consequences of GW. Yahoo does not actually write any news, but they do choose what they think is important. Today there is also a feature story about the Guvinator parking illegally.
Yahoo, MSN, and Google shape public policy (perhaps more) than just about any organization in the US.
There was one link to Climategate, and it is gone.
The last two days, Yahoo's front page has had pictures of icebergs. The article attributes them to GW. Three days ago the story was also GW. That article talked about the dire consequences of GW. Yahoo does not actually write any news, but they do choose what they think is important. Today there is also a feature story about the Guvinator parking illegally.
Yahoo, MSN, and Google shape public policy (perhaps more) than just about any organization in the US.
There was one link to Climategate, and it is gone.
Exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. We have miles to go before we sleep.......
I certainly hope you're right about this. But this assumes that enough people care about exposing their bias to make anything significant happen. That I'm not at all sure about.
As Sanrene said, GW has become a world-wide religion. The mindless followers of it thrive on leftist bias and would be crushed if it ever changed. Yes, in a sane world big things would happen and heads would roll. But the fact that this nonsense has gone on to the extent it has - for as long as it has - reminds us that it is not a sane world. There are too many..well..shall we say mentally challenged..out there to be able to safely predict logical outcomes.
Again, I clearly want what you want here. It's just that my confidence in the common sense of the masses of my fellow man has dwindled over the years to near zero. I hope I'm pleasantly surprised.
Oh I share a certain bit of cynicism myself concerning people of today, but I still believe there are people out there who do care about the truth of the issues and from the looks of it, they are slowly getting involved and are in a position to effect change in the issue.
This is still in a denial phase. People are shocked and in disbelief almost as if this has to be a hoax. That will pass, and when the anger phase sets in, you will see people ducking for cover.
Oh I share a certain bit of cynicism myself concerning people of today, but I still believe there are people out there who do care about the truth of the issues and from the looks of it, they are slowly getting involved and are in a position to effect change in the issue.
This is still in a denial phase. People are shocked and in disbelief almost as if this has to be a hoax. That will pass, and when the anger phase sets in, you will see people ducking for cover.
I think we need to look at the fact that all this ties in with some people with names like Van Jones. Beck talked a bit today about how the Reds of yore managed to see that Green would work so much better for them. I think that Jones was determined to change everything to green which for him was really red or had been red. Jones admitted that he saw the Green Movement as a wonderful vehicle to accomplish what the Reds had not been able to get done.
What is the color you get when you mix green and red? I think that it may be easy to find out if you mix all those czars into one heap.
The Green movement came out of progressive thinking and was taken over by the old Reds of yore.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
