The University does not see any conflict of interest in Lord Oxburgh's affiliation with Globe UK, a small parliamentary body from which he receives no financial reward and whose members include well-known parliamentarians such as Ken Clarke, Chris Huhne, Lord Fowler, Simon Hughes and Tim Yeo.
Lord Oxburgh's views on climate change are a matter of public record.
The University fully expects that Lord Oxburgh and the panel will question CRU's work in the most objective way, and is committed to taking whatever action is necessary following publication of his report.
Full story at El Reg.
Readers who have expressed concern over the use of green propaganda in schools will be interested in this, a report on the Climate Change Schools Project.
The students really benefitted from the experience and really seem more aware of the different issues connected to climate change. They often now come to school in the morning to ask if I have heard the news and telling me we really do need to do something- Last week it was the fact that 1 in 6 houses are going to be at risk of flooding in the later part of this century.’
TonyN at Harmless Sky has a new story based on the Climategate emails. He shows how IPCC authors struggled to give the impression that storms were becoming more severe when the evidence showed that the opposite was true.
New Scientist in 2005:
Failing ocean current raises fears of mini ice age
The ocean current that gives western Europe its relatively balmy climate is stuttering, raising fears that it might fail entirely and plunge the continent into a mini ice age.
The dramatic finding comes from a study of ocean circulation in the North Atlantic, which found a 30% reduction in the warm currents that carry water north from the Gulf Stream.
The slow-down, which has long been predicted as a possible consequence of global warming, will give renewed urgency to intergovernmental talks in Montreal, Canada, this week on a successor to the Kyoto Protocol.
The American Geophysical Union press release 2010
New measurements of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, part of the global ocean conveyor belt that helps regulate climate around the North Atlantic, show no significant slowing over the past 15 years. The data suggest the circulation may have even sped up slightly in the recent past.
The findings are the result of a new monitoring technique, developed by oceanographer Josh Willis of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., using measurements from ocean-observing satellites and profiling floats. The findings are published today in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union (AGU).
Failing ocean current raises fears of mini ice age
Doug Keenan in the comments gives some of the backstory to the Bryden paper that was the source of the original New Scientist piece:
A scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory noticed that the paper had a simple error in arithmetic—and that when the error was corrected, there was no evidence of slowing circulation. The scientist, Petr Chylek, published his criticism of the paper in the popular journal Physics Today . I asked Chylek why his correction was not published in Nature. Chylek replied: "Although they [Nature] did not deny that my criticism was correct, they decided not to publish as being of no great interest to Nature readers".
The Guardian reports that Dr Simon Lewis, an expert in tropical rain forests from the University of Leeds, has made a formal complaint to the Press Complaints Commission about Jonathan Leake's Amazongate article in the Sunday Times.
Leake's article said that the IPCC had reported that 40% of the Amazonian rainforest was very sensitive to changes in rainfall and might therefore be wiped out by global warming. Leake observed that this claim was based on a WWF report that cited in turn a Nature paper that had nothing to do with rainfall.
Another set of minutes of Sir Muir Russell's panel has been published. Not much has happened.
- They are going to give £1500 to the Science Media Centre
- They are going to appoint a project manager
- Peter Clark says BP has not funded CRU in recent years
- Evidence to be published
- Norton and Clark to meet Jones and Osborn
The UK House of Commons register of all-party groups for GLOBE appears here. Not very interesting, but it looks as though the board may have changed recently. The officers of the Parliamentary group (Who may be different to the company board) are:
Lord Hunt of Chesterton
Readers have already noted Stephen Byers' recent problems. It's only fair therefore to note that Eric Joyce is a remarkable character - the first MP to claim more than £1m in expenses and on more than one occasion the most expensive MP in the house. He once famously claimed for three oil paintings on expenses "because they looked nice".
In 2009 Colin Challen called for all UK domestic flights to be phased out by the end of the year.
Reader, Cumbrian Lad, has been doing a sterling job researching the GLOBE organisation mentioned in earlier postings today, and which counts Lord Oxburgh as a director. It was a bit of an oversight for Lord O not to mention this, as GLOBE turns out to be quite an interesting body.
GLOVE's corporate structure and funding are not clear from its website, but Cumbrian Lad has discovered that it is a private limited company. Interesting that - an organisation of legislators, run as a private company. He has also obtained copies of its accounts and other information from Companies House.
Icecap has an interesting new article by three sceptic scientists - John McLean, Chris de Freitas and Bob Carter - describing the successful attempts to deny them a right of reply in the peer-reviewed literature.
The practice of editorial rejection of the authors’ response to criticism is unprecedented in our experience. It is surprising because it amounts to the editorial usurping of the right of authors to defend their paper and deprives readers from hearing all sides of a scientific discussion before they make up their own minds on an issue. It is declaring that the journal editor - or the reviewers to whom he defers - will decide if authors can defend papers that have already been positively reviewed and been published by that same journal. Such an attitude is the antithesis of productive scientific discussion.
Read the whole thing (PDF).