|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:35 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
But I suppose we already knew this from those emails:
From: Phil Jones <[email protected]>
To: "Michael E. Mann" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: have you seen this?
Date: Wed Mar 31 09:09:04 2004
Mike,
Yes, but not had a chance to read it yet. Too much else going on. Ed has a paper
reworking Esper et al. as you'll know. If you're going to Tucson, I suggest you talk to
Keith about it then - don't email him as he's too busy preparing to go and marking essays.
Jan is in one of our EU projects. Seems that Keith thinks Jan is reinventing a lot of
Keith's
work, renamed the RCS method and much more. Jan doesn't always take in what is in
the literature even though he purports to read it. He's now looking at homogenization
techniques for temperature to check the Siberian temperature data. We keep telling him the
decline is also in N. Europe, N. America (where we use all the recently homogenized
Canadian data). The decline may be slightly larger in Siberia, but it is elsewhere as
well.
Also Siberia is one of the worst places to look at homogeneity, as the stations aren't
that
close together (as they are in Fennoscandia and most of Canada) and also the temperature
varies an awful lot from year to year.
Recently rejected two papers (one for JGR and for GRL) from people saying CRU has it
wrong over Siberia. Went to town in both reviews, hopefully successfully. If either
appears
I will be very surprised, but you never know with GRL.
Cheers
Phil |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chris_J2
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Location: From Brisbane, Au.
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:31 am Post subject: AGW |
|
|
| What's the latest from 'Carbonhagen'? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/12/16/live-from-copenhagen-un-official-admits-copenhagen-conference-%E2%80%9Cis-not-a-climate-change-negotiation%E2%80%9D/
| Quote: |
Janos Pasztor�the Director of U.N. secretary-general Ban Ki-moon�s Climate Change Support Team�was characterizing the nature of the talks between the rich and poor nations of the world when he said the following: �This is not a climate-change negotiation � It�s about something much more fundamental. It�s about economic strength.� The nations at the negotiation, he added, �just have to slug it out.�
That is a remarkable statement, and may turn out to be the most truthful comment made during this entire two-week conference.
All 192 nations negotiating here in Copenhagen know Mr. Pasztor�s characterization to be true, but none say so. They speak of the United States� �climate debt� owed to the rest of the world and that the U.S. and other developed nations owe �climate reparations� to the developing world to the tune of $100 billion a year.
Mr. Pasztor is correct�what is going on in Copenhagen this fortnight is anything but a climate change negotiation. It is an international political debate over global redistribution of wealth and control of energy resources, masquerading as an environmental conference. |
We could give "developing" (time to ditch the -ing) nations 1 trillion dollars a year and (outside of east Asia) their governments will just piss it away and the people will remain backwards and dysfunctional. Screw that. I've known from day 1 that this whole thing was a scam to create global welfare.
We need, in the West, right wing nationalist governments that will remove these psychotic globalist liberals from positions of power. Enough is enough. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
mutter mutter BIG OIL mutter mutter |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/12/16/live-from-copenhagen-un-official-admits-copenhagen-conference-%E2%80%9Cis-not-a-climate-change-negotiation%E2%80%9D/
| Quote: |
Janos Pasztor�the Director of U.N. secretary-general Ban Ki-moon�s Climate Change Support Team�was characterizing the nature of the talks between the rich and poor nations of the world when he said the following: �This is not a climate-change negotiation � It�s about something much more fundamental. It�s about economic strength.� The nations at the negotiation, he added, �just have to slug it out.�
That is a remarkable statement, and may turn out to be the most truthful comment made during this entire two-week conference.
All 192 nations negotiating here in Copenhagen know Mr. Pasztor�s characterization to be true, but none say so. They speak of the United States� �climate debt� owed to the rest of the world and that the U.S. and other developed nations owe �climate reparations� to the developing world to the tune of $100 billion a year.
Mr. Pasztor is correct�what is going on in Copenhagen this fortnight is anything but a climate change negotiation. It is an international political debate over global redistribution of wealth and control of energy resources, masquerading as an environmental conference. |
We could give "developing" (time to ditch the -ing) nations 1 trillion dollars a year and (outside of east Asia) their governments will just piss it away and the people will remain backwards and dysfunctional. Screw that. I've known from day 1 that this whole thing was a scam to create global welfare.
We need, in the West, right wing nationalist governments that will remove these psychotic globalist liberals from positions of power. Enough is enough. |
Astonishing, their not even hiding anymore. Do they really believe that the majority of citizens in Western economies will eat this BS? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/1157999.html
| Quote: |
Would you be upset if you knew your government was about to get duped in a con that would cost your family at least $3,000 a year in new taxes? That is exactly what is happening in Copenhagen right now.
The developing world has teamed up with global warming activists in Copenhagen at the world climate conference. Together they are planning the big con. Key to the con is to play on the eco-guilt of the developed world, using it to scam cash from "rich countries" and transferring it to the developing world, all in the name of "ending climate change." The Copenhagen grifters are hoping to cash the cheques before the developing world wakes up to the con.
A leaked draft version of the agreement on the table at the Copenhagen climate conference reveals plans for a massive transfer of wealth out of Canada. This transfer will come in the form of new taxes and the establishment of a new world government body for climate change housed in the World Bank.
Lord Christopher Monckton is reported to have obtained a working copy of the draft agreement. He warns that the secretive draft version of the Copen-hagen climate change treaty represents a global government power grab on an "unimaginable scale," and mandates the creation of 700 new bureaucracies as well as a colossal raft of new taxes including two per cent levies on GDP and a two per cent tax on every international financial transaction.
The draft agreement also reportedly contains a provision for a "uniform global levy of $2 per tonne of CO2 for all fossil fuel emissions," as well as an additional tax on every commercial plane journey, except ones that go in or out of poorer countries.
Of course, in addition to these various taxes, the draft agreement, reportedly pushed by President Barack Obama, the U.K. and Denmark, would require auctioning of allowances to emit carbon dioxide � a cap-and-tax scheme. Failing to purchase permits would be met with financial penalties or outright prohibitions against such emissions.
The two per cent tax on GDP alone would cost Canada some $26 billion. The $2-a-tonne tax would add up to $500 million per year. And the tax on international financial transactions would soak untold billions. This total tax grab is at least $26.5 billion, or over $3,000 a year for every Canadian family � not including the tax on financial transactions or plane trips.
This idea would be bad enough even if the cash was meant to stay in Canada. But it is not. The scheme is designed to send this cash to 49 developing nations for them to reduce their CO2 emissions and to create so-called green projects. These 49 countries include the likes of Uganda, Burundi and Sudan.
There is a perception that taxing CO2 will only hurt Canada�s West. However, CO2 emission data from Environment Canada for 2008 reveals that Alberta won�t be alone to feel the pain. While Alberta would bear 42 per cent of this burden, Ontario would have to pay for 26 per cent, due mainly to its substantial reliance on coal for electricity. Moreover, while the energy may be produced in Alberta, a large percentage of Alberta�s oil and gas is consumed in Eastern Canada and many of those taxes will be passed along.
Further, imposing a tax on international financial transactions will place new pressures on Canada�s banks, which, so far, have survived sub-prime mortgage challenges and have weathered the global economic storm.
Canadian families work too hard to see thousands of their tax dollars go from their pockets to some "green" project in Sudan. The Harper government should save Canadians from this international massive tax grab.
Kevin Gaudet is federal director, Canadian Taxpayers Federation. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nasa-shows-quiet-sun-means-cooling-of-earths-upper-atmosphere-79432252.html
| Quote: |
| HAMPTON, Va., Dec. 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- New measurements from a NASA satellite show a dramatic cooling in the upper atmosphere that correlates with the declining phase of the current solar cycle. For the first time, researchers can show a timely link between the Sun and the climate of Earth's thermosphere, the region above 100 km, an essential step in making accurate predictions of climate change in the high atmosphere. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chris_J2
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Location: From Brisbane, Au.
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:30 am Post subject: AGW |
|
|
Hey axiom, if you see any good links on the effect and cost to Australia, similar to mises' good post above (on the $ effect on Canada), pls post 'em here. I saw one figure of $7 billion, & another of $ 400 billion, quoted by Abbott in a quick google search.
And if anyone in this thread is still here in Korea in 2012, the next climate change meeting is being held in South Korea. I expect to see you all out protesting with banners & flags! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:45 am Post subject: Re: AGW |
|
|
| chris_J2 wrote: |
Hey axiom, if you see any good links on the effect and cost to Australia, similar to mises' good post above (on the $ effect on Canada), pls post 'em here. I saw one figure of $7 billion, & another of $ 400 billion, quoted by Abbott in a quick google search.
And if anyone in this thread is still here in Korea in 2012, the next climate change meeting is being held in South Korea. I expect to see you all out protesting with banners & flags! |
Should be there by then.
http://www.news.com.au/money/money-matters/emissions-trading-scheme-will-cost-australian-families-1100-a-year/story-e6frfmd9-1225803490366
Emissions Trading Scheme will cost Australian families $1100 a year
| Quote: |
KEVIN Rudd's Emissions Trading Scheme will increase the average family's bills by about $1100 a year.
Based on the Federal Government's own modelling, by 2012 the ETS will add more than 20 per cent to electricity tariffs - a surge of nearly $300 for typical households already reeling in New South Wales from a similar blow from the state pricing tribunal in July. |
Last edited by Axiom on Fri Dec 18, 2009 2:40 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Let's see what the warmist fundamentalists think of this!!
This green religion is looking more cultish everyday.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704398304574598230426037244.html
How to Manufacture a Climate Consensus
The East Anglia emails are just the tip of the iceberg. I should know.
By PATRICK J. MICHAELS
| Quote: |
Few people understand the real significance of Climategate, the now-famous hacking of emails from the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (CRU). Most see the contents as demonstrating some arbitrary manipulating of various climate data sources in order to fit preconceived hypotheses (true), or as stonewalling and requesting colleagues to destroy emails to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in the face of potential or actual Freedom of Information requests (also true).
But there's something much, much worse going on�a silencing of climate scientists, akin to filtering what goes in the bible, that will have consequences for public policy, including the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) recent categorization of carbon dioxide as a "pollutant."
The bible I'm referring to, of course, is the refereed scientific literature. It's our canon, and it's all we have really had to go on in climate science (until the Internet has so rudely interrupted). When scientists make putative compendia of that literature, such as is done by the U.N. climate change panel every six years, the writers assume that the peer-reviewed literature is a true and unbiased sample of the state of climate science. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Slowly, slowly!!!!
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/scientists-crying-wolf-over-coral/story-e6frg6nf-1225811910634
Scientists 'crying wolf' over coral
| Quote: |
A SENIOR marine researcher has accused Australian scientists of "crying wolf" over the threat of climate change to the Great Barrier Reef, exposing deep division about its vulnerability.
Peter Ridd's rejection of the consensus position that the reef is doomed unless greenhouse emissions are checked comes as new research on the Keppel group, hugging Queensland's central coast, reveals its resilience after coral bleaching. Professor Ridd, a physicist with Townsville's James Cook University who has spent 25 years investigating the impact of coastal runoff and other problems for the reef, challenged the widely accepted notion that coral bleaching would wipe it out if climate change continued to increase sea surface temperatures. Instead of dying, the reef could expand south towards Brisbane as waters below it became warmer and more tolerable for corals, he said.
His suggestion is backed up by an Australian Institute of Marine Science research team headed by veteran reef scientist Ray Berkelmans, which has documented astonishing levels of recovery on the Keppel outcrops devastated by bleaching in 2006. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 11:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2009/dec/16/fact-based-climate-debate/
By Lee C. Gerhard
December 16, 2009
Fact-based climate debate
| Quote: |
It is crucial that scientists are factually accurate when they do speak out, that they ignore media hype and maintain a clinical detachment from social or other agendas. There are facts and data that are ignored in the maelstrom of social and economic agendas swirling about Copenhagen.
Greenhouse gases and their effects are well-known. Here are some of things we know:
� The most effective greenhouse gas is water vapor, comprising approximately 95 percent of the total greenhouse effect.
� Carbon dioxide concentration has been continually rising for nearly 100 years. It continues to rise, but carbon dioxide concentrations at present are near the lowest in geologic history.
� Temperature change correlation with carbon dioxide levels is not statistically significant.
� There are no data that definitively relate carbon dioxide levels to temperature changes.
� The greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide logarithmically declines with increasing concentration. At present levels, any additional carbon dioxide can have very little effect.
We also know a lot about Earth temperature changes:
� Global temperature changes naturally all of the time, in both directions and at many scales of intensity.
� The warmest year in the U.S. in the last century was 1934, not 1998. The U.S. has the best and most extensive temperature records in the world.
� Global temperature peaked in 1998 on the current 60-80 year cycle, and has been episodically declining ever since. This cooling absolutely falsifies claims that human carbon dioxide emissions are a controlling factor in Earth temperature.
� Voluminous historic records demonstrate the Medieval Climate Optimum (MCO) was real and that the �hockey stick� graphic that attempted to deny that fact was at best bad science. The MCO was considerably warmer than the end of the 20th century.
� During the last 100 years, temperature has both risen and fallen, including the present cooling. All the changes in temperature of the last 100 years are in normal historic ranges, both in absolute value and, most importantly, rate of change.
Contrary to many public statements:
� Effects of temperature change are absolutely independent of the cause of the temperature change.
� Global hurricane, cyclonic and major storm activity is near 30-year lows. Any increase in cost of damages by storms is a product of increasing population density in vulnerable areas such as along the shores and property value inflation, not due to any increase in frequency or severity of storms.
� Polar bears have survived and thrived over periods of extreme cold and extreme warmth over hundreds of thousands of years � extremes far in excess of modern temperature changes.
� The 2009 minimum Arctic ice extent was significantly larger than the previous two years. The 2009 Antarctic maximum ice extent was significantly above the 30-year average. There are only 30 years of records.
� Rate and magnitude of sea level changes observed during the last 100 years are within normal historical ranges. Current sea level rise is tiny and, at most, justifies a prediction of perhaps ten centimeters rise in this century.
....
I have been a reviewer of the last two IPCC reports, one of the several thousand scientists who purportedly are supporters of the IPCC view that humans control global temperature. Nothing could be further from the truth. Many of us try to bring better and more current science to the IPCC, but we usually fail. Recently we found out why. The whistleblower release of e-mails and files from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University has demonstrated scientific malfeasance and a sickening violation of scientific ethics. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Axiom
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 1:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/simple_proof.pdf
A SIMPLE PROOF THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT MAN-MADE
by Dr. David Evans
| Quote: |
| Now that ClimateGate has buried the fraudulent hockey stick for good, it is easily to prove that global warming is not man-made: just compare the timing of our carbon dioxide emissions with the timing of global warming. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
