Am I still allowed to question climate change?

[convert]

It's the 'pseudo scientists with the political agenda' that we need defending against.

[truman]

Coldest December and January since records began...

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8492333.stm

[convert]

Perhaps I've got it wrong about global warming.

 

Please read this extract from a report, the link to which I'll publish later

 

The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul Ifft, at Bergen, Norway.

 

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone...

 

...Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm...

 

...Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.

 

[truman]

Perhaps I've got it wrong about global warming.

 

Please read this extract from a report, the link to which I'll publish later

 

 

Oh no..not the future according to Monbiot....

[convert]

Oh no..not the future according to Monbiot....

 

No, very much the past according to NOAA.

 

http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/050/mwr-050-11-0589a.pdf

 

In fact a weather report from October 28th 1922.

 

So the climate is changing, has always been changing and always will.

 

Let's stop looking for ways to stop it changing, and ways to tax joe public; and look for ways to help people live with the consequences of the changes.

[truman]

Remember 4,000 people contributed to the IPCC report.

 

 

Really?

 

 

http://mclean.ch/climate/docs/IPCC_numbers.pdf

[Stormy]

No, very much the past according to NOAA.

 

http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/050/mwr-050-11-0589a.pdf

 

In fact a weather report from October 28th 1922.

 

So the climate is changing, has always been changing and always will.

 

Let's stop looking for ways to stop it changing, and ways to tax joe public; and look for ways to help people live with the consequences of the changes.

 

I absolutely agree. Any political party which advocates arbitary green taxes in the name of "carbon reduction" should not get our vote.

[convert]

Really?

 

 

http://mclean.ch/climate/docs/IPCC_numbers.pdf

 

Nice try, but Wikicat has already discounted that one, as it didn't start 'Once upon a time"

[truman]

Nice try, but Wikicat has already discounted that one, as it didn't start 'Once upon a time"

 

 

Yep,there'll be some reason why it doesn't count....

[Stormy]

Not really.

 

In the context of events like the Climate Research paper being published despite its obvious flaws or the Siberian paper that was "slight" and didn't reveal "details about its methods of analysis", or the McIntyre criticisms of no relevance that have become increasingly unhinged, it should come as no surprise genuine scientists want to defend their area of work from pseudo scientists with a political agenda and from journalists that lap up any misquotes or misleading claims made by deniers like what was revealed in his previous article.

 

George Monbiot would be inclined to disagree with you.

 

These scandals have done tremendous damage. This is not because they threaten the canon of climate science – that would require similar exposés of tens of thousands of scientific papers – but because they create an atmosphere of opacity and evasion. Rajendra Pachauri's initial dismissal of questions over the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Himalayan glacier date suggests a failure to listen, which is inimical to scientific discourse. I am also amazed to learn that the IPCC doesn't pay its chairman, obliging him to work elsewhere, which has caused the other scandal in which he's embroiled. Anyone would think that running the organisation was a full-time job. This isn't a task for amateurs.

 

Throughout the hacked emails scandal, the University of East Anglia has failed to engage with public concerns or to offer convincing explanations. Its latest statement fails to address any of the major points made in the Guardian's report. The attempts by Phil Jones to block or delete material subject to a freedom of information request are indefensible: if your data isn't public and contestable, it's not scientific. Science cannot be allowed to proceed like some kind of masonic conspiracy. It is part of the common treasury of humankind and should belong to everyone from conception to publication. All data, and the statistical tools used to analyse them, should be produced at the time of publication, and I hope that one of the outcomes of this scandal is that this becomes routine. Never again should people have to use FoI requests to find out what scientists have been up to, let alone have them refused.