Have a look at this chart. It tells you pretty much all you need to know about the much-anticipated scoop by Anthony Watts of Watts Up With That?
What it means, in a nutshell, is that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – the US government body in charge of America’s temperature record, has systematically exaggerated the extent of late 20th century global warming. In fact, it has doubled it.
Is this a case of deliberate fraud by Warmist scientists hell bent on keeping their funding gravy train rolling? Well, after what we saw in Climategate anything is possible. (I mean it’s not like NOAA is run by hard-left eco activists, is it?) But I think more likely it is a case of confirmation bias. The Warmists who comprise the climate scientist establishment spend so much time communicating with other warmists and so little time paying attention to the views of dissenting scientists such as Henrik Svensmark – or Fred Singer or Richard Lindzen or indeed Anthony Watts – that it simply hasn’t occurred to them that their temperature records need adjusting downwards not upwards.
What Watts has conclusively demonstrated is that most of the weather stations in the US are so poorly sited that their temperature data is unreliable. Around 90 per cent have had their temperature readings skewed by the Urban Heat Island effect. While he has suspected this for some time what he has been unable to do until his latest, landmark paper (co-authored with Evan Jones of New York, Stephen McIntyre of Toronto, Canada, and Dr. John R. Christy from the Department of Atmospheric Science, University of Alabama, Huntsville) is to put precise figures on the degree of distortion involved.
I think common people should step in & they have to do something to protect environment. Then & then we can get something substantial results. I belong to Sedona Arizona & recently I have joined Gabriel of Sedona community. I am feeling very good. Our mission is running program to protect the environment and to stand up for the poor and disenfranchised of the world.
I’m afraid you’ve already made your first big mistake Rick since environmentalism specifically harms your targeted aid demographic. If you truly want to help the poor and disenfranchised then you need to support development (which environmentalists obstruct), free market capitalism (which environmentalists abhor) and free trade (anathema to the Left altogether).
Have to agree w/the Editor here, Rick. I’ve been to many places in N & S America, Europe and Asia, and I can tell you that the freer the markets, the wealthier the common person becomes, and the cleaner the local environment gets. For example, you can readily swim in the ocean off the coast of Los Angeles, home of millions of capitalists, while the Mosquito Coast of Central America is unfit to stand next ot near towns of 50,000 or less.
Both earlier comments missed THE point. THE point is, ” I am feeling very good”. As long as Rick is “feeling very good”, well, then not much chance of having a logical discussion.
You know what, G, you’re absolutely right: as long as Rick feels good, the rest of us should simply butt out.
Also, for all we know, the organization he mentioned is secretly active spreading capitalism, freedom of energy, and property rights initiatives around Arizona, the USA, and the world – in other words, efforts which actually DO benefit the environment, the poor and the disenfranchised. We just ASSUMED they were a misanthrope watermelon club (not to say “complete nut jobs”), and we should be ashamed of ourselves.
I for one offer my apologies to you, Rick.
No single group has done more to destroy mankind than the environmentalists.
I’ve been to Sedona. I didn’t see the fragile ecosystem.
“Gabriel of Sedona has long been involved with the American Civil Liberties Union and the Southern Poverty Law Center.”
Nice resume.
“I’ve been to Sedona. I didn’t see the fragile ecosystem.”
No surprise there,
“You can literally put facts in front of people, and they will just ignore them,”
Yup.
Milloy is head of the Free Enterprise Action Fund, a mutual fund he runs with former tobacco executive
Update your smears Harold.
Dear editor, if you have to censor my posts, doesn’t that add up to confessing that your ideas can’t hold up?
No Harold, it means you are among a select few who can not be trusted to make comments which are true, accurate, on topic and not actionable. Considering we’ve managed to hold intelligent debates over the years with antivaxers, organic food promoters, faith healers and autism conspiracy believers, inter alia without needing to place them on moderation hold suggests you have a peculiar um, talent. I suspect you keep coming back here because other places you try to post ban you fairly quickly. We, however, have a policy of trying to let everyone have their say, even you.
The Free Enterprise Action Fund MERGED with the Congressional Effect Fund on July 20, 2009.
[Snip... Steve has not been associated with FEAF since '09 Harold but you seem to feel you are on to some great conspiracy - get over it.]
And just to tell you how smart these guys are, so far this year they have produced returns of MINUS 0.54%, and for the last three years produced an overall 2.12% annualized.
Anyone for savings bonds?
“environmentalism specifically harms your targeted aid demographic”
Dear editor, would you please supply citations and references to back that up?
Not necessary Harold, just go to any major enviro site – WWF are some of the most egregious – and follow their links bragging about development hindered (dams stopped, litigated against… , roads, logging projects, power stations [coal, hydro... ]… ).
Heck Harold, you could even give some thought to the poor Chinese paying the price of Western green infatuation with solar and wind, even the Economist, Guardian and Times have run features on it in the last few years. I’m guessing you think these are just planted right-wing propaganda, duping innocent but otherwise dependable publications?
Dear editor, not necessary, or not possible?
Please, if it is so easy, help me out.
References should be at your fingertips.
After all, that’s the whole purpose of this site.
If you can’t do that, why do you exist here?
Oh, this took, ooh, seconds:
Yup, building roads and houses are definite threats to poor people, right Harold?
“…bragging about development hindered…”
I’m sorry, I couldn’t find that. I did find some coherent and sensible discussion. There. Not here.
“building roads and houses are definite threats to poor people, right Harold?”
If you asked the people who used to live in the path of I-95 through Liberty City in Miami, FL, you would get a different viewpoint.
If you asked the indigenes of the tropical rain forest, where roads mean logging, you’d get a different answer.
So yes, roads and houses are a definite threat to poor people.
To you, roads are progress. To many others, people who have the same rights as you, roads are a disaster.
If you cannot understand that then I think I do understand something of what motivates you.
But let’s digress for a moment.
Your views are not widely held, and in fact are contrary to might be called ‘established science’.
No government is going to act contrary to established science.
Your beliefs have approximately zero chance of ever being considered in formulating government policy.
Why don’t you find a way to make money in the new reality, and then go do it?
Instead of making a living putting people behind the curve, do things that put them ahead of the curve.
Cleared of verbiage you think wealthy, predominantly white eco-imperialists are correct trying to keep poor underdeveloped regions as a kind of theme park, I disagree.
Interesting, isn’t it, that people from underdeveloped and impoverished regions undertake desperate voyages in less-than-ideal vessels to escape poverty and find a better life in developed countries. Never seem to hear about such desperate efforts to get to underdeveloped regions though.
Dear editor, I seem to think that wealthy, predominantly white capitalists have gotten too old and fat to be able to adapt to changing conditions, and are desperate to preserve the status quo until they figure out how to make a buck off it.
Interesting, isn’t it, that you seem to see ‘people from underdeveloped and impoverished regions’ as a homogenous mass, unable to differentiate between Haitian refugees and the Brazilian tribes that have come out of the rainforest to sue for their rights in courts.
That you see reality in such simple terms is a good indication of why your thought processes are so rigid and bigoted.
I wish I thought I could change that, but really, I don’t.
I’ll change your kids though, and I think that will be enough.
Yes Harold, that you view all who hold a different perspective as evil capitalists is a common theme in your rants. Also noticeable is that you throw a lot of chaff into the wind hoping no one will notice you never attempt to rebut demonstration that the IPCC’s WG1 (The Scientific Basis is their specified realm) don’t actually claim CAGW and their formulae lead to conclusions of innocuous outcome. I conclude you are either on the green payroll to harass and distract people from the facts or you have a personality disorder that causes you to seek attention here.
Sir, I bring your attention to Hanlon’s Razor:
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.