Thursday, 17 December 2009

A LONG READ, WITH COMPLICATED STUFF IN IT ...

 ... and as such, I'm publishing it for Chris, in particular, to read:

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/pachauri_letter.pdf

It will, of course, be interesting to anyone else who wants to know more about the ongoing money rip-off climate scam. Thank goodness for the internet thingy eh? They have, actually, already started the moves to bring it under the same measure of ideological control as they have achieved over the mainstream media. We are going to have a fight on our hands. The excuse they will use is "to protect the children" in various ways. An attempt was made in the very early days of the internet to create a "Britain only" internal internet. Fortunately that got nowhere. We do have a banned list though, and anyone can find themselves on it at any time. What that'll mean is that you can still blog etc. but no one else can find you. So you don't know you're banned unless someone gets access to the list and finds their own site on it. The Danish and Australian banned lists are on WikiLeaks (I've seen them). Turned out that one of those on the Australian list was a common-or-garden dentist - who admitted wondering why he was getting no hits on his website.

Anyone got a link where I can find the British banned list?

Morg
.

I expect to do jail time, as a political prisoner, before I die.

Morg

17 comments:

Chris Hill said...

Hi Morg,

I'll look at that site later this afternoon, or tonight, and get back with a comment after I've done that. I'm off Christmas shopping now, ten bob goes nowhere these days does it?

From
Chris Hill
(Lancaster)

Sir Henry Morgan said...

I can remember the time when you felt quite well off if you had a ten bob note in your pocket.

Sigh ...

Chris Hill said...

That's a much nicer background!

Chris Hill said...

Hi Morg,

Well where should I start?

Firstly neither Lord Monckton nor Senator Fielding are scientist (although the Senator does have an Engineering degree), so I think we should question their skills in the discipline of climatology. To question those abilities of course does not necessarily disqualify them from holding informed opinions, but we must ask why so many (by far the vast majority in fact) of those who are highly qualified in that science, disagree with them.

They start off by saying that the hockey stick graph has been discredited, but give no supporting evidence for that assumption, and it has not been. The hockey stick graph was in-fact validate as being essentially correct after an investigation and report by the "Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate"' published in 2006 The report agreed that there were statistical shortcomings in it, but concluded that they were small in effect and did not alter the overall trend of the graph.

They (Monckton & Fielding) then go on to use the medieval warm period as proof of their claims about the uncertainty of Global Warming. However in that period (800-1300 AD) Global temperature were in fact about 0.040 C lower than at the start of the 20th Century. It was a warm period in North Western Europe only! " see the IPCC's report the period here."'

At this point I'm afraid I lost patience with these two gentlemen. They are attempting to fog the issues of a debate which was, for all scientific purposes, over years ago: Global Warming is a fact, and the human races are almost certainly one of its major causes. But if anyone thinks they can prove otherwise they should write a scientific paper and get it peer reviewed (please note: Lord Monckton reading it does not count as peer review [joke]).

There are hundreds of billions of dollars at stake here for the international oil companies and Arab Sheiks. By confusing the issues, and delaying action, they add to their already bulging coffers.

From
Chris Hill
(Lancaster)

Sir Henry Morgan said...

We'll have to differ on this Chris, and especially with relying on anything coming from the IPPC (who's director is, incidentally, a railway engineer not a scientist - but we'll let that go shall we?)

My education was in two schools of science not arts - I do understand statistics and the scientific method, and the global warming crowd have run a coach and horses through them. Even if they announced that tomorrow the sun would rise in the east - I'd get up early to check for myself. They are not scientists, only ideologues pretending to be scientists because then they can take advantage of public respect for scientists while they perpetrate their criminal fraud.

Did you know that the American Department of Energy has taken the first step of initiating an investigation into this whole business? Criminal charges are sure to follow with extraditions to the U.S. for that part of "The Team" that is based this side of the Atlantic.

Then American-style Federal prison for many years. They wont enjoy that any more than I would.

We differ then. OK - I have a couple of files available further to this one, which I'm inclined to post on the main blog.
.
Do you think the police/FBI that will do them will be scientists? Or the judge that sentences them?

You are just using the "Scientist" tag as a way of avoiding bombarding your brain with mind-changing information. It's a known method of denial.

Andy said...

Firstly, there is no such a job as a "scientist". They are researchers who live within a field or fields of expertise.

Anyway, These graphs show not only the "hockey stick" graph to be a fraud; They doctored the numbers and that was found out after 2006, sorry. That is now undeniable but if we look closer to today at the timeline/temperature graphs. they show ever rapidly steeper falls in temperature! This has happened over too many years to say the "hockey stick" is true. If it was, its dead anyway.

If all this is not good enough. I don't recall such frequency we now have snow before Christmas!

The BBC is in dismay over the fact that toeing the Government line means they now have to turn the propaganda on full. Hehehe. Not obvious!

Chris Hill said...

Dear Andy (01:45 hrs),

You say that the graphs shown in this report (or perhaps more correctly I should say this glossy attempt to mislead people about the facts of Climate Change) show that the hockey stick graph has been discredited, but that simply isn't true. In fact all attempts to do so have failed miserably, and all reputable scientific institutions now recognise that Global Warming is a fact. Yes there are a few individual scientists (even an occasional minor climatologist) who dispute its connection with human activity, but the over whelming scientific consensus in all countries (apart from Saudi Arabia of course) is that Global Warming is a fact and that the human races are to blame.

But if you can produce one recent (say the last 5 years) accredited scientific paper to refute that please direct me to it.

From
Chris Hill
(Lancaster)

Chris Hill said...

Dear Andy (01:45 hrs),

You might like to watch this video produced by a independent citizen in the US. He (at least as far as I'm aware) has no connection with any scientific professional institution or body, and therefore it is unlikely that he has an axe to grind here.

"A brief and reasoned critique of the hacked emails from an informed layman"

Of course all the facts presented on this video should be independently verified if we were going to site them in a peer reviewed paper. However in this case I think simply listening to the explanations he advances in the video, and then considering whether they rings true is legitimate. To me he sounds like he's done some digging to get at the truth of climate change (almost certainly more than any of us have), and he puts forward some good ideas (not theories there're different remember) which he appears to have developed using a logical analysis and an open mind. Proving we don't have to be scientists to have an opinion about Climate Change, but we must base those opinions on the science presented to us by the scientific community.

From
Chris Hill
(Lancaster)

Chris Hill said...

Hi Morg,

The Wigan blog is looking a lot more professional now with its new background colour, and the addition of video clips a few months ago should also added to its popularity. But I have noticed Charles seems to be contributing less these days, I really enjoy his local stories (they are of course what a local blog should be about), but I wish he'd add a few more local photographs and videos to enhance them even further (if a picture is worth a thousand words, then a video ten million), but I guess he's a busy man theses days.

As for the last video you posted, you can still go in and change the size now, you don't necessarily need to do it at the time of posting.

Anyway Morg keep well and enjoy your Christmas with friends (I always find Wigan to be a very friendly place as well).

Chris Hill
(Lancaster)

Andy said...

Firstly Chris, an idea is a theory at the end of the day.

For a man with no axe to grind he must of spent ages getting that one so well timed and video edited! Doesn't anyone out there know tree rings thin out with age on many species?

One rule you will see off anyone working to propaganda rules is to talk continuously and smoothly. along with catching a small error and making it the holy grail of wrongness. BUMF! stamped with an "F". He also strings his argument most cleverly by actually agreeing with the anti global warming texts that he presents. Go back and listen very carefully, stop the film and go back, etc. Another propaganda trick one has to be careful for. This guy is no bored Joe with time on his hands and a mobile phone to work with.

I really would like to carry on believing you Chris because it gives us Nationalists the most powerful reasons to stop peoples from warm countries being fed to breed and travel here. We could have more holidays and/or better quality lives instead of giving billions of our hard earned to the unwanted.
The Gov't. would consider the carbon footprint for large families (Muslims would hate that!).
They would stop importation of people because the footprint would enlarge.
It would allow more fossil fuels to be around further into the future.

Personally I don't care much about chatter. I've got the data here. From all sources. Theres no "hockey stick". Sure CO2 has gone up but that could of easily been offset by not cutting back the rainforests to grow cattle and ethanol.

Its been nice and sunny today Chris. My solar water heater has heated the water to a scolding 53C.

I'm green because I'm mean. >:-D

This video makes clear statements:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5j4QstRsSg

BRITISHLADY said...

ANDY,

agree good post.

Chris Hill said...

Dear Andy (07:57 hrs),

You said:
"For a man with no axe to grind he must of spent ages getting that one so well timed and video edited"

I say:
We should not knock a man for doing a go job, and this gentleman certainly has done a good job!

You say:
"The Gov't. would consider the carbon footprint for large families (Muslims would hate that!).
They would stop importation of people because the footprint would enlarge.
It would allow more fossil fuels to be around further into the future."

I say:
I 100% agree. My augment is not that our government is trust worthy (it isn't), but the vast majority of scientist are.

You say:
"I've got the data here. From all sources. Theres no "hockey stick". Sure CO2 has gone up but that could of easily been offset by not cutting back the rainforests to grow cattle and ethanol."

I say:
Here I'm slightly confused, these are not well structure sentences and their meaning is unclear. However if you mean we should be expanding the rain forests, rather than cutting them down, I 100% agree. The science is clear, CO2 in the atmosphere traps heat, more trees would mean less CO2 in the atmosphere (trees store CO2 ), and a reduction in, or stop to, Global Warming.

You said:
"Its been nice and sunny today Chris. My solar water heater has heated the water to a scolding 53C."

I say:
Well done that man, using solar energy will help enormously and must be part of the final solution to this problem.

Chris Hill
(Lancaster)

PS.
I'll watch the video you link to now.

Chris Hill said...

Dear Andy (07:57 hrs),

I missed this at first but,
you said:
"Firstly Chris, an idea is a theory at the end of the day."

I say:
Absolutely not! A scientific theory (unlike a mathematical theory) is an explanation of observed events which stands up under investigation. It is not simply some vague idea.

Scientific theories start of as mere contentions. They are then tested and legitimate attempts are made to discredit them. Once that process is over (at least for the time being) they are used to predict events, and the outcome of other experimental investigations. Eventually if the idea prove to be useful and can be supported by observations, then it may (in the fullness of time) be accepted as a theory.

Chris Hill
(Lancaster)

Sir Henry Morgan said...

Fine in theory (so to say) Chris - shame Jones et al didn't work to that formula. The LAST thing you do if you want respect as a scientist is "adjust" the data and discard any that doesn't fit your IDEA. And you categorically do NOT keep it secret.

PROVEN FACT: the New Zealand climate record has been fiddled to show warming where actually there is none; ditto Australian data; and now the Russians are alleging that their weather data was fiddled too.

Whatever else the global warming crew are, scientists is not it. Scumbags might come close and they WILL one day stand trial for what they have attempted to do.

Don't bother replying to this Chris if all you've got is the same old same old ... You have decidedly lost and by continuing like this you are just going to heap loss onto humiliation.

Wonder why Monckton was singled out by the Danish police yesterday and assaulted? ... and had his mobile phone stolen from his pocket while he was unconscious.

Your argument is finished.

Chris Hill said...

Hi Morg,

You Said:
"PROVEN FACT: the New Zealand climate record has been fiddled to show warming where actually there is none; ditto Australian data; and now the Russians are alleging that their weather data was fiddled too."

I say:
OK if these fiddles have been proven as you say they have, I ask: "by whom have these fiddles been proven and where is the report documenting this dishonesty?"

You said:
" Don't bother replying to this Chris if all you've got is the same old same old ... You have decidedly lost and by continuing like this you are just going to heap loss onto humiliation."

I say:
I may well ask the same questions about your postings, but that is because you continue to ignore those questions. As for losing the argument, regardless of who loss or win Global Warming is a fact!

Chris Hill
(Lancaster)

Sir Henry Morgan said...

Global warming or cooling has always been a fact. NOBODY denies. The only question over its attribution.

It was happening before humans existed, it's still happening. So the serious question has to be - WHAT's causing it because it certainly isn't humans.

Regarding New Zealand - do your own googling. I just now found it first go.

Sir Henry Morgan said...

Just google New Zealand climate data manipulation. First item.

But you know this stuff better than me don't you.

I used to believe the same nonsense you do. But that was because I only ever got to hear your side, which was all the msm and the politicos talked about. That changed once I had access to the other side of the argument, which turned out to be a much better one.

But then - at least my mind, anyway is open and I do read contrary info on any issue. No Egyptian river running through my head.

yaz