“PERHAPS the major environmental news of the week was a friendly interview of Phil Jones, the former head of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU), by BBC’s Roger Harabin. After the interview, a question and answer statement, with some corrections, was released by BBC.
In the interview Jones stated that although there has been a modest warming trend since 1995, it is not statistically significant. Further, there is no statistically significant difference among the four warming trends of 1860-1880, 1910-40, 1975-1995, and 1975-2009. Thus, one can not use the global surface temperature record to statistically establish that the recent warming was different from past warming periods. Many “skeptics” have been vindicated – the global surface temperature datasets do not establish a statistically defensible link between carbon dioxide emissions and the recent warming.
Jones claims the agreement between the CRU and the NASA GISS, and NOAA datasets indicates nothing is wrong. However all three may be wrong. Reports by D’Aleo, Watts, the Russian Institute of Economic Analysis, etc. strongly suggest that the three global surface temperature datasets have been heavily compromised in recent years and likely contain strong warming biases.
These revelations contradict the findings of the IPCC and US EPA in its Endangerment Finding. Since, IPCC and EPA failed to offer strong physical evidence that the recent warming was caused by carbon dioxide emissions, their claims that CO2 was the cause are not scientifically defensible by statistics or physical science.
On New Year’s Eve, after years of requests under the Freedom of Information Act, NASA GISS released emails and data related to its reports on global surface temperatures. The NASA GISS dataset depends, in part, on NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center dataset but is calculated differently. It will take diligent work to understand the full impact of what is being revealed. But the January reports by D’Aleo, et al. on the disappearance of 565 of 600 Canadian weather stations from NASA and NOAA datasets are indications of what may come.
As a whole, the US media has been dismissive of the importance of Climategate and subsequent revelations. The non-scientific claims of the IPCC are considered by many commentators as insignificant. A reading of Chapter 9, “Transforming the Energy Sector and Addressing Climate Change,” in the recently released Economic Report of the President illustrates the significance of the scientifically unsupported claims by IPCC.
The chapter begins by citing claims that CO2 emissions will likely cause large temperature increases – all from IPCC models that have never been validated thus have no predictive power. It continues with claims of “increased mortality rates, reduced agricultural yields in many parts of the world, and rising sea levels that could inundate low-lying coastal areas.”
“The planet has not experienced such a rapid warming on a global scale in many thousands of years, and never as a result of emissions from human activity.”
Elsewhere the President’s report cites EPA’s Endangerment Finding, calculates massive increases in property damage from increased severity of storms, justifies cap-and-trade, and promotes spending $60 Billion in cash and $30 Billion in tax credits for alternative energy. Of course tax credits benefit only those with high tax liabilities (high incomes).
The claims of increased mortality rates and reduced agriculture yields (found in IPCC reports) are directly contradicted by late 20th Century history, the period claimed to be one of unprecedented warming. During this time mortality rates generally went down, human longevity up, and agricultural yields increased dramatically. Ironically, after declaring agricultural yields will decline the President’s report embraced an increase in mandatory bio-fuel use in gasoline from 9 billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion gallons by 2022. It does not calculate the farm acreage required for this effort.
The claimed massive increases in property damage are, no doubt, based on IPCC’s claim in which the actual study found no statistically significant link between warming and catastrophic property damage. Sea levels have increased about 400 feet in the last 18,000 years or about 27 inches per century. The report cites a 7 inch rise since 1900 as if it is alarming. The statement that the “planet has not experienced such a rapid warming” has no merit.
Perhaps most journalists consider spending $90 Billion on various schemes to “fight climate change” insignificant. But one would hope for better scientific justification.
Finally, on Tuesday, the last day, SEPP, CEI and NIPCC filed a supplement to their joint petition to EPA to reconsider its Endangerment Finding. Others filing petitions include the states of Texas and Virginia, Peabody Energy, and a consortium of cattle, mining, and energy companies. The petitions are part of the public record. No doubt some will accuse SEPP of being a front for special interests. And, in one way, it is. The interest is the public interest in having rigorous science, rather than faulty science, guide public policy. The petition and the supplement are attached for TWTW readers to decide.
Also on Tuesday, SEPP joined CEI and FreedomWorks in a joint petition to the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to review the Endangerment Finding.
SEPP Correction: The headlines of an IBD article carried by TWTW last week implied that Arizona quit the Western Climate Initiative (WCI). SEPP was informed that this was incorrect and was sent a copy of the Governor’s Executive Order. The key issue appears to be in paragraph 3 of the order which states that Arizona will continue to be a member of WCI, however, “Arizona will not implement the GHG cap-and-trade proposal advanced by WCI”. (Emphasis added) [H/t Norman MacLeod]
ARTICLES: [For the numbered articles below please see the attached pdf.]
1. The end of the IPCC: One mistake too many!
By S. Fred Singer
Hindustan Times, Feb 5, 2010
2. A Most Important Interview,
The Clamour Of The Times, Feb 15, 2010 [H/t Mark Urbanski]
3. Climategate: So Jones Lost the Data? It Was Worthless, Anyway!
The “mean daily temperature’ CRU used is a statistically nonsensical calculation
By Vincent Gray, Pajamas Media, Feb 15, 2010 [H/t Francois Guillaumat]
4. The Continuing Climate Meltdown
Wall Street Journal, Feb 16, 2010
5. Collapse Continues
Investors Business Daily, Feb 17, 2010
6. Drilling Ban To Cost Trillions
Investors Business Daily, Feb 16, 2010
7. What to say to a global warming advocate
By Mark Landsbaum, 2-12-2010, Orange County Register
NEWS YOU CAN USE:
Question and Answer Interview with Phil Jones of the CRU
BBC News, Feb 13, 2010
Phil Jones momentous Q & A with BBC reopens the “science is settled” issues.
By Indur Gorklany, Feb 14, 2010
Climategate 2.0 – The NASA Files: U.S. Climate Science as Corrupt as CRU
By Christopher Horner, Pajamas Media, Feb 17, 2010
After two years of stonewalling, NASA GISS FOIA files are now online
Watts Up With That? Feb 17, 2010
U.N. climate panel admits Dutch sea level flaw
Reuters.com Feb 13, 2010
Another IPCC Error; Antarctic Sea Ice Increase Underestimated by 50%
World Climate Report, Feb 16, 2010
IPCC burned on claim of wildfires affecting Canadian tourism
Climatequotes.com, Feb 10, 2010
Now IPCC hurricane data is questioned
By Andrew Orlowski, The Register, UK, Feb 15, 2010 [H/t ICECAP]
Climategate: Seven Hard Questions from the Case Study of the Fall of Enron (will the AAAS panel consider them?)
By Robert Bradley, Jr., Master Resource, Feb 18 2010
The Snow Line is Moving South
By Steven Goddard, Watts Up With That, Feb 15, 2010
A new ice age in the making? An alarmist would say so.
49 states with snow, 1180 new snowfall records set in the USA this past week – is February Headed for Record Snowfall?
Watts Up With That? Feb 13, 2010
Frozen Cattle Crisis In Harsh Mongolia Winter
Sky News, Feb 8, 2010, [H/t ICECAP]
In the 1880’s great blizzards swept the US Great Plains killing humans and cattle as far south as Texas and prompting many, including Teddy Roosevelt, to question if the Plains were fit for human habitation. When we in developed nations face severe storms, we can thank use of fossil fuels and, to some extent, nuclear energy.
Many meteorologists break with science of global warming
By Rick Montgomery, Kansas City Star, Feb 13, 2010 [H/t Bill Watkins]
The dike is leaking and it is not from sea level rise.
Chicago Tribune Editorial, Feb 16, 2010
The crackup of the climate ‘consensus’
By Steven Hayward, NY Post, Feb 19, 2010 [H/t Fred Holmes]
Global warming snow job – The scientific community has abandoned science
By Leonard Evans, The Washington Times, Feb 12, 2010
Investors Business Daily, Feb 18, 2010
Solar Dynamics Observatory.
Launched Feb 11, 2010, [H/t Tom Sheehan]
The Observatory is designed to give high quality data on the changing sun and its influence on the earth, particularly changes in its magnetic fields. The experiments and data will be of interest to those following the solar flux-cosmic ray hypothesis of cloud formation.
Tisdale on the importance of El Nino’s little sister – recharging ocean heat content
By Bob Tisdale, Watts Up With That? Feb 13, 2010
Will this promote controversy?
Obama backs loans for new reactors
By Kara Rowland, Washington Times, Feb 17, 2010
A positive sign but the permitting process is a regulatory minefield. How many grass root advocates of closing down coal power plants will support new nuclear plants?
Small Reactors Generate Big Hopes
By Rebecca Smith, WSJ, Feb 18, 2010
Perhaps some of our nuclear engineers would care to comment.
Shortage of Rare Earth Elements Could Thwart Innovation
By Jeremy Hsu, Live Science. Com, Feb 16, 2010
Some alternative energy sources depend upon rare earths – is China the key?
BELOW THE BOTTOM LINE:
Consistent with Being in a Deep Fog
Roger Pielke Jr’s Blog, Feb 16, 2010
Ocean levels could rise by 12 meters in the next half century unless atmospheric temperatures are controlled! – 1957
Climate hysteria won’t last test of time
By Garth George, NZ Herald, Feb 18, 2010 [H/t Bob Kay]
“Calculating the “Average New Zealand Temperature” is as meaningless as calculating the average telephone number . . but the government thinks the country’s average temperature may have increased by 0.92C since 1853 . . . and they’re going to manage the “climate” (read Roaring Forties)? How about fixing the earthquakes first?” — Bob Kay
Penny Wong signals doom for iconic beaches
By Lanai Vasek and Matthew Franklin, The Australian, Feb 19, 2010
With Stakes This High
New York Times, Feb 17, 2010
Once again declaring the consequences of global warming are so severe that self-flagellation is desirable. What if the globe is cooling?”
from Kenneth Haapala