Senator Inhofe ser frem til sejr, mens MET gennemgår sine data

Diverse — Drokles on February 25, 2010 at 6:15 pm

Senator James Inhofe bliver interviewet af Pajamas TV og ser frem til en sejr over klimalobbyen og at Al Gore kommer til at stå skoleret overfor en Senatshøring. Inhofe har længe interesseret sig for klimadebatten fra det gik op for ham at magt skulle sive fra USA til FN og han står idag i en styrket position.

Det ene af de to ben (bemærkelsesværdig temperaturstigning og stigning i drivhusgassen CO2), som den menneskeskabte globale opvarmning går på ser ud til at slæbe en del i denne tid. Temperaturstigningen skal helst være unormal, hvis den skal overbevise os om at den ikke er normal, hvilket vil sige at mennesket har haft en afgørende og potentielt katastrofal indflydelse. Men det ser ikke ud til at temperaturen stiger med nogen hast, men at vi stille og roligt er på vej ud af den Lille Istid og gletchere smelter altid lidt i interglaciale perioder. Fred Singer gør ugentlig status med et besindigt ordvalg

Perhaps the major environmental news of the week was a friendly interview of Phil Jones, the former head of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU), by BBC’s Roger Harabin. After the interview, a question and answer statement, with some corrections, was released by BBC.

In the interview Jones stated that although there has been a modest warming trend since 1995, it is not statistically significant. Further, there is no statistically significant difference among the four warming trends of 1860-1880, 1910-40, 1975-1995, and 1975-2009. Thus, one can not use the global surface temperature record to statistically establish that the recent warming was different from past warming periods. Many “skeptics” have been vindicated – the global surface temperature datasets do not establish a statistically defensible link between carbon dioxide emissions and the recent warming.

Jones claims the agreement between the CRU and the NASA GISS, and NOAA datasets indicates nothing is wrong. However all three may be wrong. Reports by D’Aleo, Watts, the Russian Institute of Economic Analysis, etc. strongly suggest that the three global surface temperature datasets have been heavily compromised in recent years and likely contain strong warming biases.

Og denne mistanke om, at de rå data er blevet behandlet tendentiøst spreder sig, som Mail Online kan fortælle

Temperature records dating back more than 150 years are to be re-examined by the Met Office because public belief in global warming has plummeted.

The re-analysis, which was approved at a conference in Turkey this week, comes after the climate change email scandal which dealt a severe blow to the credibility of environmental science.

The Met Office says that the review is ‘timely’ and insists it does not expect to come to a different conclusion about the progress of climate change.

0 Kommentarer »

Ingen kommentarer endnu.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Kommentér indlægget...

Monokultur kører på WordPress