@Interesting

Quote:

USA taxpayers pay for this study, we own it and should have access to all info

Of course we don't 'own' things our government produces. If so please write to ensure I get my nuclear missile soon. Setting aside that poor bit of humor... We do have access to the Carlin report. It is available at many sites.

USGR Report

The United States Global Change Research Program is a body formed in 1990. The USGR is comprised of the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Interior, Health, Human Services, State, Transportation along with the EPA, NASA, NSF, and the Smithsonian Institution. It must report the state of Global Science Research to the government every 10 years. This report, therefore was mainly researched during the Bush, read anti-GW, area.

@TMTisFree

Quote:

Thanks for the video. Dr Carlin seems to be a respectable man.

well many of the "respectable men" have to keep their mouths shut or loose out on a job, sadly. This might be true about a report from NASA I heard about. New study about two weeks ago. It went quiet real quick. Said that the whole GW was due to the Sun.

_________________
"The system no longer works " -- Young Anakin Skywalker

@Interesting

Quote:

why is this info supressed then? USA taxpayers pay for this study, we own it and should have access to all info.

In spite of the pretension on the last page of this document it is not an EPA report but something done in EPA time by people whose work is not in the field of climate science. This is of course obvious when one discovers it is very much a copy and paste job from Heartland sources with a little modification. Have a look at the sources listed and see how many would have no standing whatever with mainstream climate scientists.

Although I consider the matter administratively mishandled the incident is just a beatup as I've mentioned before. Can you imagine the EPA allocating resources and personel to already well known psuedo science from that quarter? All this indignation is political posturing. Given due process the EPA would not have admitted the document in any case, but they were very clumsy.

Noel

Alarm grows over big melt in Antarctica
4:00AM Saturday Jul 04, 2009
By Eloise Gibson

Antarctica is shrinking more quickly than expected and the pace is increasing, a conference has been told.

Professor Peter Barrett of Victoria University's Antarctic Research Centre summarised the latest findings at the Annual Antarctic Conference.

Recent satellite pictures showed the frozen continent was calving glaciers from its edges at a rate adding up to about 0.4mm of sea-level rise a year.

That might not sound like much, he said, but the rate of ice loss was increasing quickly - up 75 per cent since 1996.

more at http://www.nzherald.co.nz/science/news/article.cfm?c_id=82&objectid=10582441

ExxonMobil continuing to fund climate sceptic groups, records show
Records show ExxonMobil gave hundreds of thousands of pounds to lobby groups that have published 'misleading and inaccurate information' about climate change

David Adam, environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 1 July 2009 16.51 BST

The world's largest oil company is continuing to fund lobby groups that question the reality of global warming, despite a public pledge to cut support for such climate change denial, a new analysis shows.

Company records show that ExxonMobil handed over hundreds of thousands of pounds to such lobby groups in 2008. These include the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) in Dallas, Texas, which received $75,000 (£45,500), and the Heritage Foundation in Washington DC, which received $50,000.

more http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/01/exxon-mobil-climate-change-sceptics-funding

The leopard painted it's spots green but it remains a leopard - deadly to primates

Noel

@NoelFuller

Quote:

Can you imagine the EPA allocating resources and personel to already well known psuedo science from that quarter?

now you understand US government spending!

_________________
"The system no longer works " -- Young Anakin Skywalker

@NoelFuller

Quote:

Alarm grows over big melt in Antarctica

HWGA. Is it me or every 3 monthes or so a believer pops up to spread alarm about Antarctica?







What about switching off the noisy alarm then (and taking some fluoxetine if so much worried)?

Bye,
TMTisFree

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@NoelFuller

Quote:

ExxonMobil continuing to fund climate sceptic groups, records show

That is shame: good oil money diverted into Science scepticism (a job of public funds) instead of into drilling for more oil. Finances of governments are really low. Anyway the funding's numbers are so low it must be the pocket money of the CEO. Ridiculously yellowed and populist journalism.

Quote:

"Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense."

- Carl Sagan

Bye,
TMTisFree

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@NoelFuller

Quote:

Can you imagine the EPA allocating resources and personel to already well known psuedo science from that quarter?

Of course no. They have an agenda to respect. That the reality physically diverges from it is just a minor annoyance: what is the reality in front of a flawed ideology? That the original hypothesis has been falsified both physically and observationally numerous time is no more than a small disturbance: what is the Physics and the measurement faced with state-of-the-art out-of-the-reality computer models? That hardcore physicians have rebutted the pseudo-physic of climatologists (with thermodynamic and radiative physic) can just be forgotten because back-to-the-envelop wrong calculations and crackpot simplistic ideas can be well hidden behind the transcendental idea of saving the planet: who would not want to save the planet?

So of course no. What are the low ExxonMobil funds when compared with the billions of $ and the control/power you can get with such an agenda? AGW is a trojan horse of world socialism disguised in green habits. CO² is just the lever to reach the agenda's goal. It has to be fought for what it is: a devious doctrine.

Edit grammar

Bye,
TMTisFree

Last edited by TMTisFree on 06-Jul-2009 at 10:26 PM.

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@TMTisFree

Bottom line is:

"There is no greenhouse effect in our atmosphere other than the mechanism that prevents night-time temperatures from dropping lower than they would otherwise, due to the presence of humidity (water vapor) – that mechanism does however not add one single degree of warmth to the day that follows and water vapor actually acts as a cooling agent during the hours of sunlight." - Dr Hans Schreuder

Dr Robert W. Wood has proved in 1909, 100 years ago, that the greenhouse effect as defined by Fourier (1824), Tyndall (1861), Arrhenius (1896) and followers (Callendar, Keeling, Hansen) is just fairy tale.

Quote:

"One definition of insanity is the compulsion to make the same mistake over and over again all the while expecting a different and successful outcome."

- Phil Brennan

Quote:

"Really new trails are rarely blazed in the great academies. The confining walls of conformist dogma are too dominating. To think originally, you must go forth into the wilderness."

- S. Warren Carey

In this thread, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!

Bye,
TMTisFree

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@TMTisFree

Quote:

Is it me or every 3 monthes or so a believer pops up to spread alarm about Antarctica?

A believer being therefore someone who actually does the research and makes the measurements?

The first two graphs you reproduce (post #128), without attribution, are misrepresentations in so far as the graphs are titled "Antarctic Ice Area" whereas the originals (without lines inserted, and correctly reproduced here http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/ , are labelled "Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Area/Anomally" Now that is a big difference considering that the article I quoted was not about sea ice at all ! It was about "calving glaciers from its edges".

On sea ice area I commend people to go to the page linked above and also look at the graph for Global Sea Ice Area.

I have been aware for quite a long time that sea ice was believed to be expanding slightly, a friend spends much of her time amongst the stuff, but I do read the reports coming out of the research there. For a reasonably balanced story on why sea ice is growing read
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16988-why-antarctic-ice-is-growing-despite-global-warming.html

The third graph about global sealevel rise shows an insert marked flat over the last few years but it should also have been inserted too for earlier periods - from 1994 for instance. Of course one should go back to source http://sealevel.colorado.edu/results.php and look up the fourth graph in the series where the inverted barometer has been applied. This means that the recorded sea levels have been corrected for atmospheric pressure, which can make quite a bit of difference, as I used to note on my jetty up a tidal river. If I did not take note of low pressure, and brought my yacht into the jetty to put on a cradle for some intertidal maintenance, the yacht could wind up stranded there for quite a long time!

The sum of your graphs: misrepresentation in two, cherry picking in one, but then I note the same bit of cherry picking all over current denialist posts.

Noel

@Interesting

Quote:

now you understand US government spending!

Grin

Noel

@TMTisFree

Quote:

Bottom line is: "There is no greenhouse effect in our atmosphere other than the mechanism that prevents night-time temperatures from dropping lower than they would otherwise, due to the presence of humidity (water vapor) ? that mechanism does however not add one single degree of warmth to the day that follows and water vapor actually acts as a cooling agent during the hours of sunlight." - Dr Hans Schreuder Dr Robert W. Wood has proved in 1909, 100 years ago, that the greenhouse effect as defined by Fourier (1824), Tyndall (1861), Arrhenius (1896) and followers (Callendar, Keeling, Hansen) is just fairy tale.

Your true belief? I was onto it in an earlier post. It is interesting to note that the flawed experiment by Herr Koch and the flawed interpretation by his professor, Ångström do not get a mention in the above. So a hundred years plus fairy tale that delayed further research for more than 40 years, and was then proven false, continues to be the belief of those who are not detered by facts and work hard to ensure we do nothing to change their carboniferous ways.

For those whose eyelids do not convulsively close with a mention of realclimate and who wish to get on the track of why I say the above, please visit this link.

Noel

Edit: RealClimate have upgraded their software so excessive delays accessing the site with OWB are now overcome.

Last edited by NoelFuller on 07-Jul-2009 at 04:14 AM.
Last edited by NoelFuller on 07-Jul-2009 at 04:12 AM.

For anyone more interested in arctic sea ice

see http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Note that the graphs are for areas with more than 15% sea ice. This makes for more reliable comparisons between years. Click on graphs to enlarge.

The blue line is tracking just above the 2007 line and more than 2 standard deviations below the 1979-2000 average. Bets are on as to where it will be in August relative to the 2007 minimum.

Much of the Arctic ice is first year ice. Multi-year ice as of February accounted for only 10% of total ice cover, down from 30% in the years up to 2000 so one can't be sure that the blue line will not fall below the 2007 record but one would rather it did not.

Noel

@Interesting

US anti-GW political stance

@Interesting

Quote:

Interesting wrote: @TMTisFree Quote: Thanks for the video. Dr Carlin seems to be a respectable man. well many of the "respectable men" have to keep their mouths shut or loose out on a job, sadly. This might be true about a report from NASA I heard about. New study about two weeks ago. It went quiet real quick. Said that the whole GW was due to the Sun.

What study are you talking about?
I searched more than 2 hours on NASA's webpage for something related to sun and GW - the most insteresting I could find was this - and it has nothing about GW being due to the sun.

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@TMTisFree

Quote:

TMTisFree wrote: @NoelFuller Quote: Alarm grows over big melt in Antarctica HWGA. Is it me or every 3 monthes or so a believer pops up to spread alarm about Antarctica? What about switching off the noisy alarm then (and taking some fluoxetine if so much worried)? Bye, TMTisFree

I think you drew the graphs yourself (to fit your argument?) - given that you didn't mention any source, which you normally did when you quoted diagrams...

Furthermore the latest study on the development of the antarctic ice sheet does point in exactly the opposite direction...

Last edited by Dandy on 07-Jul-2009 at 09:42 AM.

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@NoelFuller

Quote:

A believer being therefore someone who actually does the research and makes the measurements?

I just read a press release: no data to support the claim. We got the same alarm every year (2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009). Strangely the ice still increases...

Quote:

and correctly reproduced here http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/

I gave the Cryosphere Today link so many time in previous threads (BrianK is also cycling scares with a few hundred posts circumference) that I see you are now able to cut and paste it correctly. Good.

And you also found the Boulder Sea level change page. Bravo.

Quote:

This means that the recorded sea levels have been corrected for atmospheric pressure, which can make quite a bit of difference

From the Boulder site itself: Quote:

The inverted barometer does not have much apparent effect on the global mean sea level because the ocean as a whole is not compressible.

So much for your bla-bla. What about actually reading the available infos before?

Bye,
TMTisFree

_________________
The engineering approach to our non-problems: "build a better washer".
The scientific approach to our non-problems: "find a new energy source".
The environmentalist approach to our non-problems: "stop washing your shirts".

@Dandy

Quote:

searched more than 2 hours on NASA's webpage for something related to sun and GW - the most insteresting I could find was this - and it has nothing about GW being due to the sun.

like i said the study got hushed up. I will try and track down the info if possible when i get the time.

_________________
"The system no longer works " -- Young Anakin Skywalker