Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:56 pm Post subject:
flamesong wrote:
Personally, I'm pretty agnostic on the issue of climate change/global warming.
I remember the dire warnings of an imminent ice age when I was much younger and now they say we are going to sink under melted icebergs.
That popular 70's idea has been covered in this thread, and it turns out that it accounted for something like 7 climate papers out of 48 (rough figures) that predicted warming. Basically, the press like a sensational story, and that bears no relationship to prevailing scientific theory
flamesong wrote:
But of one thing I am certain - if there is an environmental problem which is causing a change in the climate, the solution will not be financial.
Industrial pollution is a by-product of the creation of wealth (not the exchange of it). If industrial pollution causes climate change, the solution cannot exist within a system which creates more wealth.
We are essentially on the brink of a sea-change, which will limit growth to a sustainable level - if such a thing exists. But producing gigatons of rubbish products just because that's how our received ideas of how a market economy works cannot go on.
Which scares the hell out of the right wing who cannot conceive what else there is to life. Hence Discount Munchkin et al and their political rants dressed up as cod science.
flamesong wrote:
As it appears that entrepreneurs (including Al Gore) are set to make megabucks from carbon trading schemes, it is doubtful that even if carbon emissions are the cause, carbon trading is the answer.
I'm still agnostic but it would be a fool who trusted those proponents who have their sights targeted on huge profits.
I strongly suspect you're right there, but I view it as the system being given one last chance to see if it can adapt using its own rules - that is applying financial pressure to force change. I expect it will fail and be a waste of more years that can be ill afforded, but I suppose they must have an attempt at it.
flamesong wrote:
And it bewilders me to see the anarchists and radicals cozying up to the globalists.
You'd imagine that the words "think tank" and "Monckton" and others would ring anyone's alarm bells. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Just look at the cr@p on the front page of today's Independent Newspaper. The desperation must be absolute for such tosh to be reported as "news".
Quote:
World on course for catastrophic 6° rise, reveal scientists
Fast-rising carbon emissions mean that worst-case predictions for climate change are coming true
By Steve Connor and Michael McCarthy
Wednesday, 18 November 2009
The world is now firmly on course for the worst-case scenario in terms of climate change, with average global temperatures rising by up to 6C by the end of the century, leading scientists said yesterday. Such a rise – which would be much higher nearer the poles – would have cataclysmic and irreversible consequences for the Earth, making large parts of the planet uninhabitable and threatening the basis of human civilisation.
We are headed for it, the scientists said, because the carbon dioxide emissions from industry, transport and deforestation which are responsible for warming the atmosphere have increased dramatically since 2002, in a way which no one anticipated, and are now running at treble the annual rate of the 1990s.
This means that the most extreme scenario envisaged in the last report from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, published in 2007, is now the one for which society is set, according to the 31 researchers from seven countries involved in the Global Carbon Project.
..............
Their chilling and remarkable prediction throws into sharp relief the importance of next month's UN climate conference in Copenhagen, where the world community will come together to try to construct a new agreement to bring the warming under control.
.......................
"Our understanding at the moment in the computer models we have used – and they are state of the art – suggests that carbon-cycle climate feedback has already kicked in," she said.
"These models, if you project them on into the century, show quite large feedbacks, with climate amplifying global warming by between 5 per cent and 30 per cent. There are still large uncertainties, but this is carbon-cycle climate feedback that has already started," she said.
Climate models that say just what they want them to say and just in time for the Copenhagen meeting which was fast running out of steam. LIARS _________________ Tooth Fairy denier
Santa Clause Denier
Man-made Climate Change Denier
An Infowars reader sent the following photographs of the protest against global warming scammer and opportunist Al Gore in Florida. As usual, the corporate media under-reported the number of protesters.
While Al Gore spewed his Global Warming lies in an outdoor arena we did our best to chant and educate on the TRUTH about the global warming scam! We could be heard during his lecture… and we just kept getting louder. Sufice to say I bet he’ll never do a lecture in an outdoor venue again! Also there was not 1,000 people in attendance – no way more like half of that!
Click on link to see pics of the protestors. Very heartening to know the liars are being ferreted out. _________________ Tooth Fairy denier
Santa Clause Denier
Man-made Climate Change Denier
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:17 pm Post subject:
item7 wrote:
Climate models that say just what they want them to say
... and as per usual you have not the least scrap of evidence that you even know what you're talking about.
Why not tell us all about your expertise in virtual modelling (which is good enough for every manufacturing process these days) and how it should be done.
Otherwise you'll just be another worthless internet nutter, all windandpiss signifying nothing.
Oh wait... _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Dissent about climate change theory highlighted in survey of weathercasters
Written by Tony Hake, Climate Change Examiner
Wednesday, November 18 2009 09:49
The American Meteorological Society released the results of a survey of TV meteorologists gauging their opinions on climate change. With a full 50% of respondents disagreeing that man is responsible for global warming, the survey indicates continuing cracking in the ‘consensus’ of the manmade climate change theory.
The survey results, published in the October 2009 issue of “Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society” (BAMS), show that a significant portion of meteorologists continue to doubt that man is the driving force of climate change. When asked about the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) statement that “Most of the warming since 1950 is very likely human-induced,” a full 50% either disagree or strongly disagree. 25% were neutral and a mere 24% said they agreed or strongly agreed.
Similarly, meteorologists doubt the very global climate models on which the anthropogenic global warming theory is based. These models have been shown to be incapable of predicting historical climate changes and their predictions continue to fall outside of scientific norms. Reflecting this, 52% of the meteorologists disagreed with that statement that “Global climate models are reliable in their projections for a warming of the planet.” A mere 19% said they agreed with the statement.
Respondents also showed an apparent distrust of many current sources of climate related information. The weathercasters said they wanted “to have access to “independent,” “unbiased,” and “reputable” sources of data and information that present “both sides” of the issue.”
Many highly visible meteorologists have started to speak out and voice their belief that man is not the driving force behind global warming. Their newfound outspokenness would seem to reflect a growing dissent in the scientific community despite claims of ‘consensus’ by some.
John Coleman, KUSI meteorologist and founder of the Weather Channel famously declared that, “Global warming is the greatest scam in history.” Meteorologists in the survey were asked about that specific quote and 1/3 of them agreed with the statement.
Meteorologist and Capital Weather Gang writer Matt Rogers has written that climate models that the IPCC uses are failing and not accurately reflecting reality. Rogers said that solar activity is likely to be a contributor to any warming or cooling and that despite increases in CO2 temperatures have actually decreased in the last 10 years.
Joe b******, AccuWeather Expert Senior Forecaster, recently began to voice his own opinions. Like Rogers, he has doubted the IPCC’s modeling and said that CO2 cannot have the effect climate change alarmists are touting. b****** said, “Common sense dictates that a trace gas needed for life on the planet would not be the cause for destroying life on the planet.”
The conclusions about climate change reached by these meteorologists are in direct conflict with the AMS’s own statement on the theory. That statement says that “humans have significantly contributed to this change.”
For its position on climate change, the AMS has come under fire from its own membership in the past, most famously when William (Bill) Gray, Professor Emeritus of Colorado State University said the group was being ‘hijacked’ by climate change alarmists. Gray was responding to the AMS’s decision to give its highest award to James Hansen.
Hansen is head of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies and one of the leading proponents of the manmade climate change theory. Gray said at the time that the award to Hansen was “an insult to a large number of AMS members who do not believe that humans are causing a significant amount of the global temperature increase. These awards diminish the AMS’s sterling reputation for scientific objectivity.”
Among the other highlights in the survey and the accompanying article:
* 41% said the greatest obstacle to reporting on climate change was too much scientific uncertainty
* The “data suggests a deeper cynicism among some on-air forecasters”
* The IPCC was not considered a trusted source of scientific data by some respondents who said it was “the most political”
* Former Vice President Al Gore was not thought of favorably and referred to as a “snake-oil salesman”
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:27 pm Post subject:
Report from Iron Mountain on the Possibility and Desirability of Peace. Published 1968.
Ridiculous exaggeration is not a good start Chek.
Iron Mountain report has been discussed for years.
Dismissed and denied only by fools.
chek wrote:
The book (whose existence is as disputed as the Protocols of Zion) is reputedly the same libertarian government-is-bad meme that has been popularised by Ayn Rand and other corporate friendly nutters.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:25 pm Post subject:
Mr-Bridger wrote:
the survey indicates continuing cracking in the ‘consensus’ of the manmade climate change fact.
Corrected that for you Mr. B.
The isotopes of carbon are positively identified as coming from fossil fuel burning by man.
Maybe if you actually read up some on the subject instead of wallowing in the denier sewers, you wouldn't be under the mistaken impression it's a 'theory'.
"One way that we know that human activities are responsible for the increased CO2 is simply by looking at historical records of human activities. Since the industrial revolution, we have been burning fossil fuels and clearing and burning forested land at an unprecedented rate, and these processes convert organic carbon into CO2. Careful accounting of the amount of fossil fuel that has been extracted and combusted, and how much land clearing has occurred, shows that we have produced far more CO2 than now remains in the atmosphere. The roughly 500 billion metric tons of carbon we have produced is enough to have raised the atmospheric concentration of CO2 to nearly 500 ppm. The concentrations have not reached that level because the ocean and the terrestrial biosphere have the capacity to absorb some of the CO2 we produce.* However, it is the fact that we produce CO2 faster than the ocean and biosphere can absorb it that explains the observed increase.
Another, quite independent way that we know that fossil fuel burning and land clearing specifically are responsible for the increase in CO2 in the last 150 years is through the measurement of carbon isotopes. Isotopes are simply different atoms with the same chemical behavior (isotope means “same type”) but with different masses. Carbon is composed of three different isotopes, 14C, 13C and 12C. 12C is the most common. 13C is about 1% of the total. 14C accounts for only about 1 in 1 trillion carbon atoms.
CO2 produced from burning fossil fuels or burning forests has quite a different isotopic composition from CO2 in the atmosphere. This is because plants have a preference for the lighter isotopes (12C vs. 13C); thus they have lower 13C/12C ratios. Since fossil fuels are ultimately derived from ancient plants, plants and fossil fuels all have roughly the same 13C/12C ratio – about 2% lower than that of the atmosphere. As CO2 from these materials is released into, and mixes with, the atmosphere, the average 13C/12C ratio of the atmosphere decreases.
Isotope geochemists have developed time series of variations in the 14C and 13C concentrations of atmospheric CO2. One of the methods used is to measure the 13C/12C in tree rings, and use this to infer those same ratios in atmospheric CO2. This works because during photosynthesis, trees take up carbon from the atmosphere and lay this carbon down as plant organic material in the form of rings, providing a snapshot of the atmospheric composition of that time. If the ratio of 13C/12C in atmospheric CO2 goes up or down, so does the 13C/12C of the tree rings. This isn’t to say that the tree rings have the same isotopic composition as the atmosphere – as noted above, plants have a preference for the lighter isotopes, but as long as that preference doesn’t change much, the tree-ring changes wiil track the atmospheric changes.
Sequences of annual tree rings going back thousands of years have now been analyzed for their 13C/12C ratios. Because the age of each ring is precisely known** we can make a graph of the atmospheric 13C/12C ratio vs. time. What is found is at no time in the last 10,000 years are the 13C/12C ratios in the atmosphere as low as they are today. Furthermore, the 13C/12C ratios begin to decline dramatically just as the CO2 starts to increase — around 1850 AD. This is exactly what we expect if the increased CO2 is in fact due to fossil fuel burning. Furthermore, we can trace the absorption of CO2 into the ocean by measuring the 13C/12C ratio of surface ocean waters. While the data are not as complete as the tree ring data (we have only been making these measurements for a few decades) we observe what is expected: the surface ocean 13C/12C is decreasing. Measurements of 13C/12C on corals and sponges — whose carbonate shells reflect the ocean chemistry just as tree rings record the atmospheric chemistry — show that this decline began about the same time as in the atmosphere; that is, when human CO2 production began to accelerate in earnest.***
In addition to the data from tree rings, there are also of measurements of the 13C/12C ratio in the CO2 trapped in ice cores. The tree ring and ice core data both show that the total change in the 13C/12C ratio of the atmosphere since 1850 is about 0.15%. This sounds very small but is actually very large relative to natural variability. The results show that the full glacial-to-interglacial change in 13C/12C of the atmosphere — which took many thousand years — was about 0.03%, or about 5 times less than that observed in the last 150 years.
For those who are interested in the details, some relevant references are:
Stuiver, M., Burk, R. L. and Quay, P. D. 1984. 13C/12C ratios and the transfer of biospheric carbon to the atmosphere. J. Geophys. Res. 89, 11,731-11,748.
Francey, R.J., Allison, C.E., Etheridge, D.M., Trudinger, C.M., Enting, I.G., Leuenberger, M., Langenfelds, R.L., Michel, E., Steele, L.P., 1999. A 1000-year high precision record of d13Cin atmospheric CO2. Tellus 51B, 170–193.
Quay, P.D., B. Tilbrook, C.S. Wong. Oceanic uptake of fossil fuel CO2: carbon-13 evidence. Science 256 (1992), 74-79
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:42 pm Post subject:
TonyGosling wrote:
Report from Iron Mountain on the Possibility and Desirability of Peace. Published 1968.
Ridiculous exaggeration is not a good start Chek.
Iron Mountain report has been discussed for years.
Dismissed and denied only by fools.
Right.
And you can vouch for its authenticity how?
TonyGosling wrote:
Anyway it's all becoming clear just today as 'too many people' is now also being blamed for climate change by the UN. Forced sterilisation now being contemplated, yes, by the UN. Terms of the debate being strictly controlled.
The UN has no authority, but let's hope the story gives a few hillbilly fundamentalists heart attacks anyway. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us.
Last edited by chek on Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:01 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:59 pm Post subject:
Right. And you know it is a fraud how?
This is getting pointless.
I was reading this stuf with great interest in the early 1990s.
You can't simply dismiss a 1968 report as like the protocols.
That's not an argument.
chek wrote:
Right. And you know it's authentic how?
The UN has no authority, but let's hope the story gives a few hillbilly fundamentalists heart attacks anyway.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:09 pm Post subject:
TonyGosling wrote:
Right. And you know it is a fraud how?
This is getting pointless.
I was reading this stuf with great interest in the early 1990s.
You can't simply dismiss a 1968 report as like the protocols.
That's not an argument.
Great, glad you enjoyed it.
I can however ask your reasons for believing it to be genuine, which in the end will boil down to because you choose to.
What with evidence of its 'official report' status being scant to non-existent.
But all that being by-the-by, I hope you're not going to proceed to tell us that international climate scientists are all in on a great big oh-noes hoax hatched 40 years ago, which is where I see this leading in this thread. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:23 pm Post subject:
TonyGosling wrote:
Scientists are actually divided on the issue not, as you say, of one mind.
Why misrepresent the facts like this?
Tony, there will always be contrarians and those in any profession with secondary motives which form what in statistics are called 'outliers' because they lie outside the trend. Sometimes well outside it.
However there is no valid science that stands against the consensus - and the deniers are trying hard as they can to come up with something.
And after putting their finest brains to the job for years, do you know what they came up with?
How not to read a graph.
That's what a joke they are.
Ian Plimer is their current star turn.
I'd suggest getting his book from the library (please don't buy it) and reading it in one hand with Enting's critique in the other.
After a while you'll find denier methodology is as mundane as any crooked enterprise. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:06 pm Post subject:
Which 'consensus' are you talking about?
That global warming nee climate change is entirely caused by increasd CO2 in the atmosphere put there due to burning of fossil fuels and human/animal farts?
The media consensus?
chek wrote:
However there is no valid science that stands against the consensus - and the deniers are trying hard as they can to come up with something.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:31 pm Post subject:
TonyGosling wrote:
Which 'consensus' are you talking about?
That global warming nee climate change is entirely caused by increasd CO2 in the atmosphere put there due to burning of fossil fuels?
The media consensus?
In this case I'm specifically referring to the scientific consensus on the measurable human input to changing the biosphere we all live in.
Our current media - regardless of the intentions of ordinary coal-face journalists - cannot be trusted.
Which, even should I see a story in the 'respectable' press, means I have to look for confirmation elsewhere. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Excellent denunciation of the alarmism from the prophetic "Mystic Met".
Quote:
4C, 6C, 10C? Ramping Up The Numbers Game Ahead of Copenhagen
We can expect climate hysteria to reach fever pitch as the Global Warming Industry’s Global Governance Conference in Copenhagen on December 11th draws closer. Today we have a double helping of computer modelled garbage based on absurdly high climate sensitivity to CO2. First up were the combined twin taxpayer funded bureaucracies of the UK’s ‘Mystic’ Met Office and the Soviet-style EU’s European Commission, which threatened that ‘global warming will bring killer heat, floods and storms to Britain’ as reported in The Telegraph. Apparently, if we don’t give up evils such as heating/lighting our homes, travelling to real jobs that don’t involve sponging off the taxpayer, then Italy’s pasta ‘gets it’ and temperatures could rise by up to 10C in the next 50 years. Nothing less than reducing CO2 emissions to zero by 2100 will do. I guess that rules out breathing too. Perhaps they didn’t read the 2009 European Commission paper showing that there is no greenhouse gas signal in normalized European flood losses for 1970 to 2006.
Next up, a Nature Geoscience paper enthusiastically reported by one of the BBC’s ensemble of taxpayer funded climate Marxists with the headline, Earth ‘heading for 6C’ of warming, tells us:
“Average temperatures across the world are on course to rise by up to 6C without urgent action to curb CO2 emissions, according a new analysis. Emissions rose by 29% between 2000 and 2008, says the Global Carbon Project. All of that growth came in developing countries; but a quarter of it came through production of goods for consumption in industrialised nations.”
Several points to comment on here. First, the 29% rise in CO2 emissions since 2000 has seen a zero rise in global average temperature, as illustrated by the graphs of CO2 emissions, and the 10-year temperature stagnation below:
HadCRU3 Global Temperature Data/ENSO contribution as published in BAMS, 2009
Secondly, what’s the point of the Nature Geoscience authors complaining goods produced in developing countries being exported to developed countries. Are manufactured goods and exports to be banned?
Thirdly, the claim that: “The team believes that carbon sinks – the oceans and plants – are probably absorbing a slightly lower proportion of the carbon dioxide from fossil fuel emissions than they were 50 years ago, although researchers admit that uncertainty about the behaviour of sinks remains high” contrasts with recently published real world data showing “that the balance between the airborne and the absorbed fraction of carbon dioxide has stayed approximately constant since 1850, despite emissions of carbon dioxide having risen from about 2 billion tons a year in 1850 to 35 billion tons a year now. This suggests that terrestrial ecosystems and the oceans have a much greater capacity to absorb CO2 than had been previously expected.”
So, against a background of a decade of non-warming, despite rapidly rising CO2 emissions from developing countries, 20,000 CO2 emitting climate circus performers head for Copenhagen, leaving a wake of unfounded climate alarmism behind them. 12C anyone?
Scientists are actually divided on the issue not, as you say, of one mind.
Why misrepresent the facts like this?
Haven't you figured it out Tony? Its his job. Like all the other Climate liars. _________________ Tooth Fairy denier
Santa Clause Denier
Man-made Climate Change Denier
Its LOCAL!!!! All over the Northern hemisphere its LOCAL!!! Its nothing to do with winter approaching in the northern hemisphere and that global warming is a myth. Its because "Man-made climate change" is causing unforseen effects like snow falling in winter.
Record snow in Dolomites; heavy snow in Spanish Pyrenees; 7 feet of snow for Whistler... Again, ski resorts are not suffering from any lack of snow, from warmer temperatures, from shorter seasons or from any of the things the climate alarmists promised would destroy the ski industry. Ten years ago they were squealing that by now ski resorts would be doomed. Another one of the dozens of predictions made by alarmists that hasn't materialized. The sky IS falling - as snow.
Josh Cooley
See:
Italian Dolomites Dominate Ski Reports With Early Snow
What's Happening in Other Parts of the World.
Dream start for virtually every major ski area in northern hemisphere
Dream start for virtually every major ski area in northern hemisphere
www.Skiinfo.co.uk has been firing off powder alarms at an unprecedented rate for this early in the season. The company, which receives snowfall updates loaded directly in by ski resorts all over the world, has emailed more than 60 powder alarms in recent days to registered subscribers who take advantage of the free service. An alarm is automatically triggered each time a resort reports snowfall of more than 20cm in 24 hours, but recent alarms have been set off for falls five times that size.
Continents With Resorts Open For Skiing: 2
Countries With Resorts Open For Skiing: 10
Ski Areas Open (Approximately): 200
* Great snowfalls in the Pyrenees - Formigal, Spain, may open early.
* Great snowfalls in the Rockies - resorts in Canada and Colorado already open.
* Great snowfalls in the Dolomites - Cortina, already open, has received more than 1.5m.
* Great snowfalls in the Alps - more resorts opening this week in Austria after the heavy snowfalls.
* Great snowfalls in Scandinavia - just in time for the World Cup in Levi, Finland, this weekend.
* Great snowfalls in Japan - Niseko opening soon
* Great snow in New Zealand - well a bit old but there's 2m lying, but the last resort has closed for 2009.
It' a dream start to the 2009-10 ski season for virtually every major ski region in the northern hemisphere, and although ski industry businesses are wary of tempting fate by even daring to hope of last year's great snowfalls, especially in Europe, it's hard not to be happy by all the new snow, even though it is of course too early to e sure we are set up for winter 09-10.
One of the big beneficiaries of the past week has been Italy where resorts already open like Cortina have reported another big snowfall taking their season to date fall already past 1.5m, and it's not even mid-November. Other parts of the country including Monterosa in the west are also doing well
Austria still has the widest choice of ski areas open for a single country in the Alps, with the resort's glacier ski areas plus already open Kitzbuhel and Schladming taking the numbers in to double figures. They're due to be joined this weekend by Obergurgl, the continent's highest traditional village and always an early opener. Obertauern, venue for the ski scenes in the Beatles Movie Help 45 years ago, is also due to open shortly.
Near neighbour Germany has one ski area open still, on the Zugspitz glacier near Garmisch, with a 1.2m (four foot) base.
There's been healthy snowfalls on Switzerland's ski slopes too although so far it's still the glacier ski areas of Zermatt, Saas Fee and Les Diablerets (Glacier 3000) that are reported open.
In France there's been big snowfalls in the Alps and the Pyrenees. With only Tignes open still it's difficult to find any official figures on snowfall, however the Pyrenees seem to be doing especially well in the past 72 hours with Cauterets, which received huge snowfalls last winter, reporting 1.3m (over four feet) of new snow. It will open on November 28th.
In the Alps there are many unofficial guesstimates of several feet (50-100cm) of new snow at resorts like Chamonix and Meribel where skiers and boarders have been hiking up to ski down the slopes.
However other than Tignes - where conditions are reported to be much improved with the new snow and skiing down to Val Claret - unless anyone breaks ranks, it looks like we still have to wait another 10 days for the first to open, Val Thorens on November 21st.
Across France's south Western border, ski resorts in Spain are expected to begin opening soon, and earlier than expected, after heavy snowfall was reported by a number of the country's top resorts in the Pyrenees mountains.
Temperatures have dropped, snow has been falling for the past few days and Spain's largest winter resort, Formigal, now has depths of nearly a metre (3.3 feet) at 1,900m and 35cm (14 inches) at village level (1,500m).
Formigal, Spain
Another leading resort, Baqueira Beret, has reported similar cover following two days of heavy snowfall, with a metre (3.3 feet) at the top of the ski area at 2500m, and 45cm (18 inches) in resort.
Commercial manager for Formigal, Jose Luis del Valle, said: "This is great news, we should be able to open very soon. And with our great offers like free ski hire and free lift passes for kids, a holiday to Formigal won't break the bank."
The eyes of skiing's World Cup competition will be on Scandinavia this weekend however as the circus rolls in to Finnish resort Levi, one of several already open in the country, along with Ruka amongst others.
In Sweden the resorts of Vemdalen and Klovsjo/Storhogna received between 20-30cm (8-12 inches0 of fresh snow. And the weather report looks promising for the rest of the week, with temperatures below zero.
Vemdalen plans to open on Saturday. Funasdalen and Tanndalen are already open and received about 5cm (2 inches) of new snow.
This week both the Swedish and the US Alpine Ski teams are training on the slopes in Tarnaby for the World Cup in Levi.
"We've got everything the teams need, good snow conditions for training and convenient slopeside accommodation." Said resort manager Thomas Ringbrant.
Hemsedal Opening DaySki areas open in Norway are also in to double figures with Hemsedal among those reporting over a foot of new powder to delight early skiers and boarders.
Resorts are now opening daily across North America and it's at this point that it becomes impossible to keep track, at least two or three are now open in each ski state/province in the west of the continent where many areas have had two feet or more of new snow in the past week. The majority of US ski areas will want to be open for the thanksgiving holiday in a fortnight's time.
In Colorado the number of areas open looks set to reach double figures by the weekend, with resorts like Keystone and Copper mountain having joined early-openers last month including Arapahoe Basin and Loveland.
Other Western US resorts already open or opening imminently include crystal Mountain and Mt Baker in Washington state
In the east of the US, Killington and Bretton Woods in Vermont and New Hampshire respectively opened at the weekend, joining Sunday River in Maine. Several more plan to open in the next few days including Belleayre in New York State.
In Canada more resorts have been opening in Alberta and British Columbia. Lake Louise opened last Friday, joining fellow Banff area Mt Norquay, and they're due to be joined by Marmot Basin and sunshine in the next few days. The Banff area has reported 63cm of new snow in the past few days and Marmot Basin will debut its new quad chairlift. Another Albertan resort, Nakiska, the closest to Calgary, is already open for race teams and opens to the general public this weekend - it too has a new quad chairlift.
Lake Louise Opening Day
Blessed with this great early season snowfall and one of the world's most sophisticated snowmaking systems, Lake Louise is preparing to welcome the World Cup races later this month. The Men's races will take place on November 28 to 29, and the Women's races on December 4 to 6.
Sunshine Village will open on November 11, after receiving 130cm of snowfall to date. Approximately 50 per cent of the resort's 107 runs will be accessible, with Standish, Wawa and Strawberry lifts set to open.
The newly renovated Sunshine Mountain Lodge will open 30 new eco-luxurious rooms in early December. The multimillion dollar wing replacement has not only added luxury to the Lodge, but also lowered the resort's carbon footprint.
Over in British Columbia Sun Peaks also plans to open in the next few days a week earlier than planned. Thanks to all the snow.
Continuing West, in Asia the ski season looks to be days away in Japan.
"On October 30th we saw snow falling for the first time and after a few cold dry days, we got our first dump of snow at the resort village level (approx 200m above sea level)." said Andrew Clarke of Niseko alpine developments, based in one of the country's largest resorts, Niseko. "More is forecast to come soon and the resort is due to open on approx Nov 20th. Last summer the last lifts stopped running on May 6th after a long bank holiday weekend, but only because of visitation was too low to sustain the lifts running costs, not because of any lack of snow which lasted well into June on many of the slopes."
In New Zealand the last ski area known to be open in the southern hemisphere closed at the weekend, bringing the long 2009 ski season to an end. Turoa on Mt Ruapehu still had more than two metres of snow lying on closing day,
"Both Turoa and Whakapapa have done us well this year with plenty of fine weather weekends and fresh spring snowfalls which helped extend the season at Turoa for the second year in a row. We'd like to thank everyone who visited us for their support throughout the 2009 winter season, particularly during Snovember. It's great to have the opportunity to offer another three weeks worth of skiing and riding but we couldn't do it without our wonderful customers." said a ski area statement.
'Consensus' on Climate Change is 'Fake,' scientists say
A team of scientists has sent a letter to all U.S. senators warning that a claim there is "consensus" in the scientific community on the climate change issue is false.
The letter dated Oct. 29 reads in part: "You have recently received a letter from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), purporting to convey a 'consensus' of the scientific community that immediate and drastic action is needed to avert a climatic catastrophe. . .
"The claim of consensus is fake, designed to stampede you into actions that will cripple our economy, and which you will regret for many years. There is no consensus, and even if there were, consensus is not the test of scientific validity. Theories that disagree with the facts are wrong, consensus or no."
The five signatories to the letter are:
Professor Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
Professor Fred Singer, University of Virginia
Professor Will Happer, Princeton University
Professor Larry Gould, University of Hartford
Dr. Roger Cohen, retired Manager, Strategic Planning, ExxonMobil
The letter also notes that the American Physical Society, an organization of physicists, did not sign the AAAS letter and states the society is "at this moment reviewing its stance on so-called global warming, having received a petition from its membership to do so.
That petition was signed by 160 distinguished members and fellows of the society, including one Nobelist and 12 members of the National Academies.
The 160 signatories range alphabetically from Harold M. Agnew, former White House science councilor and former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, to Martin V. Zombeck, a physicist formerly with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and include Ivar Giaever, who shared the Nobel Prize in physics in 1973.
Long-time geologist argues CO2 is not causing
global warming
12 Nov 09 - Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is a natural phenomenon caused by volcanoes and is not responsible for climate change, says Professor Ian Plimer, a geologist from Adelaide University.
The recent rise in temperature around the world was caused by solar cycles and other extra terrestrial forces, says Plimer.
"We cannot stop carbon emissions because most of them come from volcanoes," he said. "We have had huge climate change in the past and to think the very slight variations we measure today are the result of our life - we really have to put ice blocks in our drinks."
The world has experienced three periods of cooling since 1850 and carbon dioxide was increasing during many of those cooler periods, said Professor Plimer.
"If we had only had warming, then there would be a connect between CO2 and temperature, there is not," he added.
This article labels Professor Plimer a climate” sceptic,” and "denialist
poster boy." It doesn’t bother to mention that he is Emeritus Professor
of Earth Sciences at the University of Melbourne (he was Professor and
Head at the University of Melbourne from 1991 to 2005), nor does it
mention that he has published more than 120 scientific papers on
geology. Not exactly a slouch.
Professor Plimer won the Leopold von Buch Plakette (German
Geological Society), Clarke Medal (Royal Society of New South
Wales), Sir Willis Connolly Medal (Australian Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy), was elected Fellow of the Australian Academy of
Technological Sciences and Engineering and was elected Honorary
Fellow of the Geological Society of London.
I am now reading Professor Plimer’s seventh book written for the
general public – Heaven and Earth – which absolutely destroys the
concept of human- caused global warming. I highly recommend it.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 9:18 am Post subject:
item7 wrote:
Global cooling again
rinse, wash, repeat.
item7 wrote:
Another stupid attention seeking petition
rinse, wash, repeat.
item7 wrote:
Plimer the mining geologist pontificating on climate science
rinse, wash, repeat.
item7 wrote:
Oh yeah - and another exercise in how not to read a graph
rinse, wash, repeat.
item7 wrote:
Haven't you figured it out Tony? Its his job. Like all the other Climate liars.
Seems to me you'd have to be paid to keep on with the same discredited themes repeated and repeated and repeated ad nauseam. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
"The B-Cast Interview: Lord Monckton Defends His Warning for America"
Excellent hour long interview with the increasingly popular Lord Monckton who is taking the USA by storm and waking people up to the dangers of the Climate Liars. _________________ Tooth Fairy denier
Santa Clause Denier
Man-made Climate Change Denier
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 1:28 pm Post subject:
item7 wrote:
Excellent hour long interview with the increasingly unhinged Lord Monckton who is taking the USA by storm and waking people up to the dangers of the Climate Liars.
Talking of "Climate Liars", why is Diploma in Journalism Munchkin pontificating on climate change at all?
It's not like he knows anything at all about it, which is widely known, except to the Glen Beck droids.
"In July 2008 Monckton wrote article about climate sensitivity for the American Physical Society's Forum on Physics and Society concluding:
"it is very likely that in response to a doubling of pre-industrial carbon dioxide concentration [surface temperature] will rise not by the 3.26 °K [sic] suggested by the IPCC, but by <1 °K."
Some media commentators interpreted the publication of his paper as a sign that the American Physical Society had abandoned its earlier support for the scientific consensus on climate change.
In response, the APS reaffirmed its unchanged position on climate change and pointed out that the newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society "carries the statement that 'Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum.' This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed." The APS further added a disclaimer to the top of Monckton's article stating: "...Its conclusions are in disagreement with the overwhelming opinion of the world scientific community. The Council of the American Physical Society disagrees with this article's conclusions."
In a response, Monckton called the APS "red flag" "discourteous" and claimed his paper had been "scientifically reviewed in meticulous detail".
Notwithstanding, Arthur Smith, long-time member at the APS Forum, has identified 125 errors, irrelevancies, and contradictions in the article. http://altenergyaction.org/Monckton.html
Only 125 howlers this time round?
Blimey, Monckhausen must have been genning up.
But then the denierosphere do like their self-proclaimed "experts" to be just like them: ignorant and self-contradictory.
Which sounds just like you, banjoboy. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
With Hurricanes At Thirty Year Low, Gore Turns To Photoshop
The King of cap and trade simply airbrushes them in to his new book to create a more scary earth
Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com, Thursday, November 19, 2009
With the increasingly discredited notion of man-made global warming crashing and burning on a daily basis, climate alarmists are being forced to accelerate their fearmongering to unprecedented levels. With the evidence failing to match up to the doomsday proclamations, Al Gore has turned to photoshop in order to make a CO2-choked earth look scary enough to sell his cap and trade scam.
The latest example of climate cult fakery comes in the form of the front cover of Al Gore’s new book, Our Choice; A Plan To Solve The Climate Crisis.
Shortly after the devastation of Katrina, Al Gore was busy making a correlation between hurricanes and global warming in an effort to drive home his claim that higher global CO2 emissions cause an increase in extreme weather events. The cover art for Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, features an image of a hurricane rising out of a smoke stack.
Seemingly underwhelmed that there have been no major hurricanes since Katrina, along with the fact that global hurricane activity is now at a thirty year low, Gore came up with an ingenious method of solving the problem of the lack of scary depictions of frightening hurricanes to display on his book – simply airbrush them in!
Ryan Maue, hurricane expert from the University of Florida writes:
The cover opens and closes half and half — so you only see one hurricane…as in the press release photo or the one on Amazon.
But this is the real picture sequence from the book which I looked at Borders today and took cell-phone pictures, original (before the retouching by some “artist”) Note all of the Arctic ice and the size of the Florida Peninsula…
And the final product:
There are other differences I am sure you can find — but the hurricanes are just nonsense…
Despite the fact that CO2 levels are at their highest for 15 million years, just like global temperatures, hurricane activity has dropped off dramatically, as the graph below illustrates.
Gore has now dropped the presentation from his slideshow claiming a link between CO2 emissions and hurricanes.
There is a clear correlation between the natural ebb and flow of global temperatures and hurricanes, but none whatsoever with human CO2 emissions. As many skeptics have attempted to highlight, in the face of official intimidation and quasi-religious decrees that “the debate is over,” temperature levels prompted by natural factors leads the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, not the other way around.
With his invention of scary hurricanes for the purposes of his book, Gore is merely following his new ethos that “Simply laying out the facts won’t work,” in the attempt to corral a highly skeptical public into believing claims about man-made global warming.
This represents another grasping at straws as Gore adapts his propaganda into the form of a religious sermon in a desperate effort to claw back rapidly evaporating poll numbers that show 20% of Americans have changed their minds over the last three years and become man-made global warming skeptics.
"Red Hot Lies contends that, with a new administration, the global warming lobby is about to go into overdrive, forcing through new legislation that further weakens the U.S. economy. The author presents what he believes the global warming lobby is doing and saying to advance their agenda - and what conservatives must do to counter their arguments. Chris Horner is interviewed by Jed Babbin, Editor, Human Events." _________________ Tooth Fairy denier
Santa Clause Denier
Man-made Climate Change Denier
Professor Garth Paltridge on The Climate Caper
July 25, 2009
Garth W. Paltridge, The Climate Caper: Facts and Fallacies of Global Warming (Connor Court, 2009).
From the Foreword by Lord Christopher Monckton:
Nevertheless, when the history of the bizarre intellectual aberration that is “global warming” comes to be written, once it is even clearer than it already is that the disasters, catastrophes, cataclysms and apocalypses that have been so luridly and so widely predicted have not and will not come to pass, Dr. Paltridge’s little book will be regarded as one of the few, rare, precious beacons of enlightenment that prevented humanity from wandering through carelessness, ignorance and absent-mindedness into a new Dark Age.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2009 10:53 am Post subject:
item7 wrote:
Saint Al a LIAR? - Whodathunk!!??
You'll have to point out why, of course, for the benefit of those of us who don't have conspiracy-addled brains.
You - particularly you - just claiming it doesn't convince anybody.
Then again, the denialati's focus on Al Gore is always funny in and of itself.
But we can accuse right-wing propagandist Paul Joseph Watson of Prison Planet.com of being a liar right now by deliberately ommitting this rather pertinent section from Ryan Maue's seasonal report:
"This is a natural consequence of the rather unusual flip from strong La Nina to El Nino conditions during the past calendar year, which did not happen at all during the period of 1976-2006 as indicated by the Multivariate El Niño/Southern Oscillation index.
It is expected by NOAA and others that the current El Niño is locked in for the rest of winter 2009-2010 and may indeed strengthen.
This would suggest enhanced typhoon activity in the Western Pacific throughout the rest of the fall and winter which will necessarily increase the NH ACE (Northern Hemisphere Accumulated Cyclone Energy). The Southern Hemisphere TC season may begin at any time now, but most activity is experienced between January and March. http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/
This is rather crucial, and is an example of the kind of variability of different interlocking ocean and atmospheric cycles that explain the reason that temperatures do not increase monotonically year after year. But then the Alex Jones Organisation doesn't want you to be educated about these things, they just want you to buy their propaganda and maybe even a few products while you're at it. Fight the NWO - buy an AJ hat, to paraphrase a poster here who expressed it rather aptly, I thought.
Or a used bullhorn also, I guess.
And so rather than think for yourself - or even check - what you're spamming from your professional propagandists, you're off, away, and over the hill spreading deliberately malicious misinterpretations before they can even say 'good doggie'.
911 truth is just a slogan and the end justifies the means.
Heil!
item7 wrote:
Quote:
Gore has now dropped the presentation from his slideshow claiming a link between CO2 emissions and hurricanes.
How true is that?
At every presentation?
Or, just like a band will change their set around to stop getting stale and bored, does Al and his travelling show do the same?
Do be specific Watson - as if!
Once again study of the graphs, with some elementary knowledge of what a trend is will indicate what is likely to happen after the signal dips down to a trough. Yes, that's right class - it's normally followed by an even higher peak. But then you're not supposed to think for yourself in Watson's World.
item7 wrote:
Quote:
There is a clear correlation between the natural ebb and flow of global temperatures and hurricanes, but none whatsoever with human CO2 emissions.
And so Watson pretends having no understanding of what the AGW debate is about with crass use of weasel words 'natural ebb and flow' as if he doesn't know that in descending order, 2005, 1998, 2002, 2003 2004 have been the hottest years ever recorded since the 1890's.
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/2005_warmest.html
Notice the way that the cycles referred to previously means the peak temperatures aren't in numerical order, something the professional deniers feign puzzlement about for the benefit of their sheep.
item7 wrote:
Quote:
As many skeptics have attempted to highlight, in the face of official intimidation and quasi-religious decrees that “the debate is over,” temperature levels prompted by natural factors leads the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, not the other way around.
...and again Watson asserts with no evidence, in the same manner as someone who says that because lightning caused fires before man appeared, therefore matches can't be the cause of fire.
Thus is denier pretzel logic and will ever be so, because they don't want you to understand for yourself, they want you to accept their agenda.
But then Watson does have a thing about Gore that somehow makes him think that lying is OK, which of course it never is.
He publicly griped recently that Gore "wasn't interested in any carbon offset schemes that didn't line his own pocket", pointing to a story featuring Timothy LaSalle, CEO of the Rodale Institute who champions soil sequestration of carbon.
His venomous drivel can be found on page 30 of this thread.
The pertinent information he left out in that case was:
a) that Rodale publishes Gore's books,
b) Chapters 9 and 10 of Gore's new book is exactly about the subject
and
c) that LaSalle's scheme involves wholesale international conversion to organic farming which would take two to three generations to achieve, and may not at the end of that period produce enough food for everyone.
But why let the truth stand in the way of a bit of stone-age conservative, right-wing hillbilly Gore bashing?
item7 wrote:
Quote:
With his invention of scary hurricanes for the purposes of his book, Gore is merely following his new ethos that “Simply laying out the facts won’t work,” in the attempt to corral a highly skeptical public into believing claims about man-made global warming.
...which is a bit rich coming from the star "reporter" of one of the most truth-avoiding, fearmongering agenda-pushing outfits in Texas.
And all inspired by a book cover expressly designed to show what current predictions might actually look like.
From space.
The bottom line is, whatever Jones' expressed intent of 'fighting the globalists', in practice he's fighting for their agenda if 'the globalists' are defined as international capital, which essentially means US shareholders and their transnational tax-avoiding and environmental responsibility-avoiding corporations. Maintaining US hegemony seems to be his aim, if all his blathering about phoney New World Orders are anything to go by.
For the benefit of the hard of thinking, the global corporations have been living the 'new world order' since The Wall came down, while gullible ill-educated idiots are sent by Watson and Monckton and their ilk (has anyone ever looked into the pedigree of these characters? Scary stuff) to chase after phantoms that even by 'paranoids on teh internets' standards are ludicrous.
item7 wrote:
Quote:
This represents another grasping at straws as Gore adapts his propaganda into the form of a religious sermon in a desperate effort to claw back rapidly evaporating poll numbers that show 20% of Americans have changed their minds over the last three years and become man-made global warming skeptics.
And in typical polemic form, we get no evidence in support of these simple-minded assertions, the faithful sheep can be counted on to believe - fervently so.
That rampant unemployment and a tsunami of a recession might affect peoples perceptions of what's important in the short term does not, unfortunately make the larger problem go away. It just affects what people focus on.
After all, even if your house is on fire, you might be distracted by the fact your hair is also on fire before tending to the larger problem, even though the larger problem might be beyond control by the time your head's safe.
Now to those favourites of the thinkingly challenged - da videos.
"Christopher C. Horner is a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a think tank that's received more than
$2 million in funding from ExxonMobil since 1998, among other corporate funders.
Horner is a practicing attorney". http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Chris_Horner
I don't suppose banjo7 either can or will explain why a lawyer who's interests are the furtherance of an ultra-capitalist feudal agenda (or "the ''wrong' politics" as banjoboy quaintly puts it) has any relevance to a debate about what is happening in the natural world - other to explain how it upsets his primary economic interests. Boo hoo.
And of course garth Paltridge.
"In 2005 Paltridge was still the eternal optimist. "I personally don't believe that climate change, even significant climate change, will necessarily be a doomsday outcome," he said. "It's just as likely to be beneficial for a lot of people, and the thing that worries me about the whole IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] process is that they simply assume that climate change will be dreadful and disastrous and therefore we should spend as much effort and money as we can lay our hands on to stop it happening, and I just don't think that's the way to look at it. One hundred years ago when greenhouse warming was first mooted, the people at that time thought a bit of greenhouse warming of the world would be good for everybody.Interview with Gary Kemble, "Adaptation the key to surviving climate change, scientists say", ABC Premium News (Australia), April 4, 2005.
In his book, Paltridge claims that there is "no longer much argument among scientists about the existence of the greenhouse global warming phenomenon", and never was. However, he posits, the effect may not be large enough to be seriously noticeable, let alone large enough to be disastrous. He says the coming changes are "inherently unpredictable" and that "in 50 or a 100 years the forecasts of doom will have been tested and, with any luck, proved wrong".http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=9303&page=0
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Garth_Paltridge
He doesn't explain why mankind should trust in luck, he just thinks we should.
Maybe if you were retired and didn't have that much longer to go and were seeking a second income from the denier gravy train, you would too.
Or not. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Inhofe declares victory in speech on global warming
Written by Jim Myers, Tulsa World
Thursday, November 19 2009 09:47
U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, perhaps Congress’ most vocal skeptic of man-made global warming, essentially declared victory Wednesday in a lengthy speech on the Senate floor.
“I proudly declare 2009 as the ‘Year of the Skeptic,’ the year in which scientists who question the so-called global warming consensus are being heard,’’ the Oklahoma Republican said.
“Until this year, any scientist, reporter or politician who dared raise even the slightest suspicion about the science behind global warming was dismissed and repeatedly mocked.’’
Inhofe recalled his own 2003 remarks in which he said much of the debate over global warming was predicated on fear rather than science.
Alarmists warned of a future plagued by catastrophic flooding, economic dislocations, droughts and mosquito-borne diseases, he said.
Inhofe also recalled his most famous comment in which he suggested that man-made global warming would turn out to be “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.”
“Today, I have been vindicated,’’ he said.
Inhofe pointed to the upcoming international conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, which previously was viewed as a chance for nations to make some kind of a binding agreement on greenhouse gases.
White House aides said Sunday that a fully binding legal agreement would be put off until a December 2010 meeting in Mexico City, The Associated Press reported.
Inhofe said Wednesday that “the reality, of course, is that Copenhagen will be a disaster.’’
Inhofe is the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. He recently helped lead a Republican boycott of that panel’s efforts to act on a major climate change bill.
Democrats were forced to vote the measure out of committee without amendments, and an effort already is under way to come up with a different bill.
That measure now is not expected to be taken up in the Senate until next year.
Global Warming: The True-Believer Mindset (Uploaded 14 August 2009)
Impervious to reason and reality, followers of the Green Gospel turn a blind eye to all else. Featuring Dr. Robert Balling, Arizona State University, USA. _________________ Tooth Fairy denier
Santa Clause Denier
Man-made Climate Change Denier
Breaking News Story: CRU has apparently been hacked – hundreds of files released
The details on this are still sketchy, we’ll probably never know what went on. But it appears that University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit has been hacked and many many files have been released by the hacker or person unknown.
An unknown person put postings on some climate skeptic websites that advertised an FTP file on a Russian FTP server, here is the message that was placed on the Air Vent today:
We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps. We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documents.
The file was large, about 61 megabytes, containing hundreds of files. It contained data, code, and emails from Phil Jones at CRU to and from many people.
I’ve (WUWT) seen the file, it appears to be genuine and from CRU. Others who have seen it concur- it appears genuine. There are so many files it appears unlikely that it is a hoax. The effort would be too great.
UPDATE1: Steve McIntyre posted this on Climate Audit, I used a screen cap rather than direct link because CA is overloaded and slow at the moment.
UPDATE2: Response from CRU h/t to WUWT reader “Nev”
The director of Britain’s leading Climate Research Unit, Phil Jones, has told Investigate magazine’s TGIF Edition tonight that his organization has been hacked, and the data flying all over the internet appears to be genuine.
In an exclusive interview, Jones told TGIF, “It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago that someone had hacked into our system and taken and copied loads of data files and emails.”
“Have you alerted police”
“Not yet. We were not aware of what had been taken.”
Jones says he was first tipped off to the security breach by colleagues at the website RealClimate.
“Real Climate were given information, but took it down off their site and told me they would send it across to me. They didn’t do that. I only found out it had been released five minutes ago.”
TGIF asked Jones about the controversial email discussing “hiding the decline”, and Jones explained what he was trying to say…. _________________ Simon - http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
