« Open Thread | Main | More Children Taught to Sing Praise to Obama »
September 23, 2009
Temperature Stats Go Down Memory Hole
Despite cooling temperatures, our rulers continue to lay the groundwork for using the discredited global warming hoax as a pretext to impose poverty and totalitarianism. Due to growing public skepticism, they will not be able to accomplish this through the Legislative Branch. No matter: under Obamunism, the legislature is an anachronism anyway. Congresscrumbs admit that they don't even read the legislation they pass, much less write it; that's done by shadowy ultra-left activist groups like the Apollo Alliance. The Executive Branch — with its legions of unelected czars and regulatory agencies — calls the shots.
This makes unaccountable and unnecessary bureaucracies like the EPA more powerful — and potentially more tyrannical — than anything the Founding Fathers could have imagined. The watermelons pushing the global warming hoax are more than happy to remove any speed bumps on their march to absolute power. Via NRO:
In the early 1980s, with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy, scientists at the United Kingdom's University of East Anglia established the Climate Research Unit (CRU) to produce the world's first comprehensive history of surface temperature. It's known in the trade as the "Jones and Wigley" record for its authors, Phil Jones and Tom Wigley, and it served as the primary reference standard for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) until 2007. It was this record that prompted the IPCC to claim a "discernible human influence on global climate."
Putting together such a record isn't at all easy. Weather stations weren't really designed to monitor global climate. Long-standing ones were usually established at points of commerce, which tend to grow into cities that induce spurious warming trends in their records. Trees grow up around thermometers and lower the afternoon temperature. Further, as documented by the University of Colorado's Roger Pielke Sr., many of the stations themselves are placed in locations, such as in parking lots or near heat vents, where artificially high temperatures are bound to be recorded.
So the weather data that go into the historical climate records that are required to verify models of global warming aren't the original records at all. Jones and Wigley, however, weren't specific about what was done to which station in order to produce their record, which, according to the IPCC, showed a warming of 0.6° +/- 0.2°C in the 20th century.
Now begins the fun. Warwick Hughes, an Australian scientist, wondered where that "+/-" came from, so he politely wrote Phil Jones in early 2005, asking for the original data. Jones's response to a fellow scientist attempting to replicate his work was, "We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?"
Reread that statement, for it is breathtaking in its anti-scientific thrust. In fact, the entire purpose of replication is to "try and find something wrong." The ultimate objective of science is to do things so well that, indeed, nothing is wrong.
However, global warming is about politics, not science. More requests were made for the original, unfudged data. Stall tactics were employed. The requests escalated, until finally Jones denied that the original data even exists. Implausibly, he now claims it was destroyed decades ago to save storage space.
Here's why the data went down the memory hole:
It now appears likely that the U.S. Senate will drop cap-and-trade climate legislation from its docket this fall — whereupon the Obama Environmental Protection Agency is going to step in and issue regulations on carbon-dioxide emissions. Unlike a law, which can't be challenged on a scientific basis, a regulation can. If there are no data, there's no science.
Extremely bad people will soon be doing extremely bad things to our country in the name of a "crisis" that does not exist. Anything that gets in their way will be altered, suppressed, or destroyed.
On a tip from Bergbikr.
Posted by Van Helsing at September 23, 2009 12:41 PM
Comments
Good find, Bergbikr. Good summary, VH.
Letting the non-scientist climate change researchers dig their own graves is best. Trouble is, few besides us are ready to pile in the dirt (thus far).
Posted by: The MaryHunter at September 23, 2009 12:58 PM
I've posted this too many times already, but daily I check this chart of the observed polar ice levels. The chart is live from the International Arctic Research Center and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency.
You'll notice that this summer the media's ice melting stories have been all over the place. Well, note what happens to the polar ice levels in the summer!
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png
Posted by: Air2air at September 23, 2009 1:21 PM
Air2air,
Right on. I just posted something similar on a different thread:
"The National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) released a graph showing the different projections for the Arctic sea ice minimum that will occur sometime in September. The researchers make projections using a variety of techniques, ranging from sophisticated sea ice [models] to simpler statistical analyses."
http://global-warming.accuweather.com/2009/07/where_will_the_arctic_sea_ice.html#comments
16 different research teams predicted between 4.0 to 5.2 million sq km as the minimum this year.
IJIS reports that the minimum for 2009 was 5.25 million sq km, reached on September 13th.
Despite their expertise and techniques, the sea ice minimum was greater than all projections made by the NSIDC researchers. All of them.
Posted by: RICH at September 23, 2009 1:59 PM
We're also in for a decade of cold weather... the enviro-nuts are worried about that because it would make their case hard to sell.
Posted by: Ryan at September 23, 2009 2:59 PM
People don't read. People don't look things up.
People listen to a few minutes of news.
The ozone hole failure was too easily fixed.
The Earth Summit in Rio 1992 stated that a new threat must be found.
And it was: the gas humans exhale: C02.
Read the 1992 Earth Summit minutes (gorbachev/gore).
Read the "Club of Rome" NGO website (gorbachev/gore+) as to implementation tactics.
Read the UN's Agenda 21, and Millennium Development goals.
It's very simple, and they told us what they are doing. Take the time to read the info for yourself at their websites.
If you are NOT a collectivist, it WILL piss you off.
The fight should be brought to their own bullet lists, and thousand page reports proscribing "global eco-justice" and other communist agendas.
Forget news drivel, read the plans of attack for yourself.
Want to see more? read:
Barack Obama's Global Poverty Act S.2433
Worldwide gun control under the UN's Millennium Development Goals.
I kid you not. Under all of the manufactured crisis the obvious is concealed.
Posted by: Joe Lender at September 23, 2009 3:03 PM
Thank you Joe Lender for bringing up that 1992 Earth Summit. I've been telling all the brain dead libs that I know to read about all the Earth Summits from as far back as the 80's. If they'll do the research then they'll realize that all of this GW bull shit is a manufactured hoax. Nancy Pelosi attended the Rio Earth Summit where they came up with the idea of "sustainable resoursces" which has now made it's way into the lefts lexicon.
Posted by: Tom at September 23, 2009 5:02 PM
"We have 25 years or so invested in the work."
That right there is a tip-off that a problem exists. Astute scientists do not talk like this bc it suggests an emotional investment, rather than a quantitative one.
This is how old guys working in their garages to produce a perpetual motion-machine talk.
Another thing: I guarantee you absolutely that this data exists. No scientist loses work he thinks will make his reputation as a genius and his fortune. Moreover, I can assure you that it doesn't support Jones's hypothesis. At some point, he twisted it to say what he wanted it to say, and now realizes that his data would never stand up to modern analytical techniques and comparative databases.
The man is a fraud and the left is hiding behind his quivering, urine-soaked skirts.
Posted by: Fiberal at September 23, 2009 5:52 PM
surfacestations.org is a valuable resource. 10% of the temperature data collected in the US is actually reliable.
Posted by: Scaramouche at September 23, 2009 6:29 PM
Here's the link Joe Lender was referring to:
http://24ahead.com/blog/archives/007799.html
Posted by: Sylvia at September 23, 2009 10:09 PM
And the bad news?
The output of CO2 from the burning of fossil fuel is only 10% of the output of H2O (water vapor), which is 900% more efficient as a "greenhouse gas". Burn coal, gas, oil, HYDROGEN, you create water vapor (yes there is some ash, and CO2, except with the H).
Oh wait, "fossil fuel" is stored energy, taken from.......ready for this.......air (back when the atmosphere was toxic to humans, and all air breathing animals except 90% of all now extinct air breathing animals at the time).
Want to create a truly nasty world? Make more water vapor, like fuel cells (use hydrogen [taken from oil] and convert it into "clean energy" [by forcing all the carbon out of it, which you store], somewhere) which burns H and O (the oxygen production uses fossil fuel to produce also) from a special process (never mind the fossil fuels, mining, slave labor, and energy used to produce the fuel cells) to create energy and put out only water vapor, which turns the earth into a freezer (read ice age [if it is possible to effect the influence of the SUN}[the temperature on Mars heated up exactly at the same rate as it did on Earth, with not a single SUV]).
Water vapor=clouds=cooling, or (if you believe in greenhouse effect) warming.
The only thing getting hot is the ignorant liberals standing on a platform of sand, looking down from their house on the hill, on the conservatives standing on rock, as they are laughed at for their inability to understand the reason of conservative humor.
We are the silent masses, and we will take this country back, and make it better than it has ever been.
wow, sorry about the speel.
Posted by: Eric at September 23, 2009 11:56 PM
http://global-warming.accuweather.com/2009/07/where_will_the_arctic_sea_ice.html#comments
16 different research teams predicted between 4.0 to 5.2 million sq km as the minimum this year.
IJIS reports that the minimum for 2009 was 5.25 million sq km, reached on September 13th.
Despite their expertise and techniques, the sea ice minimum was greater than all projections made by the NSIDC researchers. All of them.
Would someone please answer a question for me, one that I've had for years about this whole ice thing? It's directed at those who firmly believe that our polar icecaps are shrinking, regardless of cause:
Would you feel better if the data showed that they were growing and thickening? That is, would you regard the prospect of glaciers advancing down over Canada, Scandinavia, and other polar regions over the next couple of centuries to be a good thing? Wouldn't that be equally alarming, if not more so?
Is this such a hard query? Because nobody seems to be willing to explain this to me.
Posted by: Cylar at September 24, 2009 12:23 AM
If anything, I find the prospect of a colder world to be the more worrisome scenario.
Posted by: Cylar at September 24, 2009 12:26 AM
If anything, I find the prospect of a colder world to be the more worrisome scenario.
Of course, anyone with an ounce of common sense does as well.
Posted by: cowlove at September 25, 2009 5:50 AM
