The Environmentalism and Global Warming Thread

[marktwain]

Well, I'm skeptical too.

Why doesn't our media cover stories like this one about a Canadian car ferry getting stuck in the ice off of Nova Scotia? Story dated yesterday.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...P=share_btn_fb

Found it!

http://iceweb1.cis.ec.gc.ca/Prod20/p...=11091&lang=en

The Labrador cold current showed a strong surface flow. Speculation is that 'displacement' of high Arctic sea water occurred.

The surface ice is now breaking up rapidly.

[Sparlingo]

Found it!

http://iceweb1.cis.ec.gc.ca/Prod20/p...=11091&lang=en

The Labrador cold current showed a strong surface flow. Speculation is that 'displacement' of high Arctic sea water occurred.

The surface ice is now breaking up rapidly.

My brother got through on a short window and only had to wait 12 hours for the ferry, some people waited 4 days and there have been numerous delays at sea, like the one shown. The thaw this year in the Atlantic Region is very slow as low tempertures continue. Meanwhile, in Western Canada the opposite.

[marktwain]

My brother got through on a short window and only had to wait 12 hours for the ferry, some people waited 4 days and there have been numerous delays at sea, like the one shown. The thaw this year in the Atlantic Region is very slow as low tempertures continue. Meanwhile, in Western Canada the opposite.

I've turned the soil in my garden....

One bright spot is that the turbulent mixing of the Labrador and the gulf stream brings plankton to the surface of the Grande Banks, and the codfish are on the upswing..

[Savez]

Scientists working in Antarctica are feeling the impact of climate change in ways the public might find surprising. Although global warming is causing Arctic ice to melt and glaciers around the world to shrink, the problem in Antarctica is that the sea ice surrounding the continent is increasing and now hampering ship navigation and resupply operations

http://news.sciencemag.org/climate/2...easing-sea-ice

[G David Bock]

NOAA Fiddles With Climate Data

NOAA Fiddles With Climate Data To Erase The 15-Year Global Warming ‘Hiatus’

EXCERPT:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientists have found a solution to the 15-year “pause” in global warming: They “adjusted” the hiatus in warming out of the temperature record.

New climate data by NOAA scientists doubles the warming trend since the late 1990s by adjusting pre-hiatus temperatures downward and inflating temperatures in more recent years.

“Newly corrected and updated global surface temperature data from NOAA’s [National Centers for Environmental Information] do not support the notion of a global warming ‘hiatus,'” wrote NOAA scientists in their study presenting newly adjusted climate data.

To increase the rate in warming, NOAA scientists put more weight on certain ocean buoy arrays, adjusted ship-based temperature readings upward, and slightly raised land-based temperatures as well. Scientists said adjusted ship-based temperature data “had the largest impact on trends for the 2000-2014 time period, accounting for 0.030°C of the 0.064°C trend difference.” They added that the “buoy offset correction contributed 0.014°C… to the difference, and the additional weight given to the buoys because of their greater accuracy contributed 0.012°C.”
...
http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/04/no...arming-hiatus/


WTF!

[wolfhnd]

The Daily Caller has a reputation for distorting the truth. Example below

The Daily Caller: Still Wrong

"Earlier this week, the Daily Caller reported that the Environmental Protection Agency was "asking taxpayers" to pay for "230,000 new bureaucrats," at a cost of $21 billion"

"But there was a problem: This was not true. As MoJo's Kate Sheppard pointed out, the Daily Caller had "managed to pull that number from a court filing about what the EPA is trying to avoid." The EPA was defending a rule that would allow it to limit the number of pollution sources it must regulate, so the agency wouldn't have to expand its workforce to such an absurd level. The EPA was not asking taxpayers to pay for 230,000 new employees; it was doing what it could to prevent this. In other words, the reality was the opposite of what the Daily Caller had reported."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...tucker-carlson

[The Doctor]

The Daily Caller has a reputation for distorting the truth. Example below

The Daily Caller: Still Wrong

"Earlier this week, the Daily Caller reported that the Environmental Protection Agency was "asking taxpayers" to pay for "230,000 new bureaucrats," at a cost of $21 billion"

"But there was a problem: This was not true. As MoJo's Kate Sheppard pointed out, the Daily Caller had "managed to pull that number from a court filing about what the EPA is trying to avoid." The EPA was defending a rule that would allow it to limit the number of pollution sources it must regulate, so the agency wouldn't have to expand its workforce to such an absurd level. The EPA was not asking taxpayers to pay for 230,000 new employees; it was doing what it could to prevent this. In other words, the reality was the opposite of what the Daily Caller had reported."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...tucker-carlson

The Daily Caller can't hold a candle to the American Association for the advancement of Science and NOAA's new National Centers for Environmental Information...

NOAA/NCDC’s new ‘pause-buster’ paper: a laughable attempt to create warming by adjusting past data

June 4, 2015
Did SNL’s Tommy Flanagan Oversee the New Surface Temperature Data?

By Bob Tisdale and Anthony Watts, commentary from Dr. Judith Curry follows

There is a new paper published the journal Science about the recent slowdown in global surface warming (released from embargo today at 2PM eastern). It is from Tom Karl and others at NOAA’s newly formed NCEI, National Centers for Environmental Information (a merger of three NOAA data centers: NCDC, NODC and NGDC) and from the government-consulting firm LMI. The lead author is Tom Karl, Director of NCEI and Chair of the Subcommittee on Global Change Research (SGCR) of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). The paper is Karl et al (2015) Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus. “Possible” is obviously the key word in the title.

There is a big push by the American Association for the advancement of Science (AAAS) to promote this paper.

[...]

Clearly, with each revision of data, NCDC is making the past cooler and the near present warmer through their adjustment process of the original data. To revisit something said in regards to a previous news story about NCDC’s tendency to adjust data as time goes on, so much so that they can’t even tell us with certainty anymore which month in the past century was the warmest on record, this is still applicable:

“Is history malleable? Can temperature data of the past be molded to fit a purpose? It certainly seems to be the case here, where the temperature for July 1936 reported … changes with the moment,” Watts told FoxNews.com.

“In the business and trading world, people go to jail for such manipulations of data.”

Hold that thought, because NCDC is at it again.


[...]

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/06/0...ing-past-data/

The National Centers for Environmental Information used to actually be 3 separate scientific entities: NCDC (National Climatic Data Center), NGDC (National Geophysical Data Center) and NODC (National Oceanographic Data Center). A "data center' collates and analyzes data. An "information center" disseminates information - AKA propaganda center.

Adjusting past data to make the 1930's cooler can reasonably be explained through data homogenization requirements. Adjusting the late-1990's to make them cooler relative to the early 2000's is nothing less than fraud.

[G David Bock]

The Daily Caller has a reputation for distorting the truth. Example below

The Daily Caller: Still Wrong

"Earlier this week, the Daily Caller reported that the Environmental Protection Agency was "asking taxpayers" to pay for "230,000 new bureaucrats," at a cost of $21 billion"

"But there was a problem: This was not true. As MoJo's Kate Sheppard pointed out, the Daily Caller had "managed to pull that number from a court filing about what the EPA is trying to avoid." The EPA was defending a rule that would allow it to limit the number of pollution sources it must regulate, so the agency wouldn't have to expand its workforce to such an absurd level. The EPA was not asking taxpayers to pay for 230,000 new employees; it was doing what it could to prevent this. In other words, the reality was the opposite of what the Daily Caller had reported."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...tucker-carlson

And Mother Jones doesn't ?!

Within the Daily Caller article is the link to the NOAA/ScienceMag. report;
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/ea...cience.aaa5632

[wolfhnd]

The best propaganda is factual. It's the unspoken conclusions that the facts lead to that we should question.

[smallvillekalel]

It's not clear what you are disputing here wolfhound, the report from the website or that NOAA played Jenga with the figures. If it's the former, there are other sources, if it's the latter, well I'm afraid I cannot convince you as your mind's probably already made up.

[The Doctor]

This is funny...

Apr 27, 2015

LONDON - Aon Risk Solutions, the global risk management business of Aon plc (NYSE: AON), today unveiled the key risks as identified by its clients across the globe. For the first time ever cyber risk entered the top 10 at number 9, reinforcing its emergence as a key risk factor. Damage to brand and reputation was cited as the top overall concern facing global organisations, further underscoring the increasing importance of cyber risk as it has been regularly linked to brand and reputation issues in the wake of data breaches.

Aon’s global clients strongly felt that damage to brand and reputation ranked as a top concern across almost all regions and industries. This can be attributed to the growing challenges businesses are facing amongst the risks found in the top 10 list, such as cyber risk, but also including business interruption, property damage and failure to innovate.

The 1400 survey respondents to the Aon Global Risk Management Survey included CEOs, CFOs and Risk Managers providing comparative insight into different perceptions of risk.

[...]

About the 2015 Aon Global Risk Management Survey

Aon’s 2015 Global Risk Management Survey is designed to offer organizations the insights necessary to compete in an increasingly complex business environment. Conducted bi-annually, the survey gathered input from 1418 respondents at public and private companies of all sizes around the world. The 2015 findings from the survey, which was conducted in 10 languages and completed by respondents from multiple countries, underscored that companies are grappling with new risks and that there are differences of opinion on how to best prioritize and respond to them.

The top 10 risks are:

1. Damage to reputation/brand
2. Economic slowdown/slow recovery
3. Regulatory/legislative changes
4. Increasing competition
5. Failure to attract or retain top talent
6. Failure to innovate/meet customer needs
7. Business interruption
8. Third party liability
9. Cyberrisk (computer crime/hacking/ viruses/malicious codes)
10. Property damage

Key movers:

Failure to innovate/meet customer needs remained at the sixth spot on Aon’s 2015 Global Risk Management Survey and is projected to rank at four in 2018. Respondents in the technology industry indicated that this is the most significant risk to their business. The threat severity of this risk tied to increasing competition, which is expected to top the list in three years, raises a red flag for the insurance industry.

Property damage also re-entered the top 10 global risk list for the first time since 2007, up from 17 in 2013. This risk was ranked highest by hotels and hospitality, non-aviation transportation and real estate. Unprecedented weather events in recent years have bundled this risk with the cause and effect of business interruption, which took the seventh spot on the 2015 list with reported losses down more than 10 percent from the 2013 survey.

[...]

http://aon.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=25776&item=137221

Setting aside the fact that there have been no "unprecedented weather events in recent years," businesses consider government solutions to climate change (2 & 3) to be greater threats than the mythical effects of climate change (7 & 10)...

[T. A. Gardner]

One should note that 2 and 3 are more relatable to government by far than 7 and 10 are to Gorebal Warming.

Property damage can occur from a wide variety of causes like, criminal damage, fire, accidents, etc. None of that relates to Gorebal Warming. I'd say weather is minor compared to accidental or criminal causes.

Same thing with Business Interruption. In fact, I'd include government as a potential cause in that one. For example, OSHA, building inspectors, health inspectors, or some such show up and close a business until their regulatory findings are fixed.

From what I see, government is far and away the number one outside potential cause of risk to a business. The other causes are mostly internal to how the business is run.

[G David Bock]

FLASHBACK: ABC's ’08 Prediction: NYC Under Water from Climate Change By June 2015

EXCERPT:
New York City underwater? Gas over $9 a gallon? A carton of milk costs almost $13? Welcome to June 12, 2015. Or at least that was the wildly-inaccurate version of 2015 predicted by ABC News exactly seven years ago. Appearing on Good Morning America in 2008, Bob Woodruff hyped Earth 2100, a special that pushed apocalyptic predictions of the then-futuristic 2015.
The segment included supposedly prophetic videos, such as a teenager declaring, "It's June 8th, 2015. One carton of milk is $12.99." (On the actual June 8, 2015, a gallon of milk cost, on average, $3.39.) Another clip featured this prediction for the current year: "Gas reached over $9 a gallon." (In reality, gas costs an average of $2.75.)

....
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-w...te-change-june

[wolfhnd]

Pope Calls Global Warming a Threat And Urges Action

"ROME—Pope Francis calls global warming a major threat to life on the planet, says it is due mainly to human activity, and describes the need to reduce the use of fossil fuels as an urgent matter"

http://www.wsj.com/articles/papal-dr...ity-1434389790

No mention of over population? No mention of "natural" climate change events? Ignores fact that it is too late to avoid?

My guess this is more an attempt to weaken conservatives than an honest attempt to address environmental issues but the guy seems a bit better than his predecessors in any case.

[T. A. Gardner]

It's getting slammed over on the science board...

http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forum...d.php?t=160495