Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Unthreaded

My Guest Post at Watts Up With That - Impartiality at the BBC

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/27/climategate-2-impartiality-at-the-bbc/#comments

I've tried to put things in context with background for anyone new'ish to the debate.

Not about AGW right or wrong, but the BBC's behaviour and imho, descent into a groupthink and advocacy for 'climate change'

Please pass it on.. (MP's especially)

Nov 28, 2011 at 9:14 AM | Unregistered CommenterBarry Woods

And just dredging something from a while back...

Doesn't the 10:10 No pressure video now make perfect sense?

The mindset is laid bare. The 10:10 video is the love child of the CG1 and CG2 actors.

It is almost like the perfect artistic expression of "their" view on the world...

Nov 28, 2011 at 8:49 AM | Unregistered CommenterJiminy Cricket

A lesson for dendro-climatologists

http://dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/100000/40000/4000/200/144270/144270.strip.print.gif

Nov 28, 2011 at 8:42 AM | Unregistered Commentersteveta_uk

Once in a while I have to remind myself. Norfolk plod have had all these emails (CG1, CG2 and those encrypted) for two whole years.

Nov 28, 2011 at 7:36 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Reed

Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Climate_change_alarmism_%282nd_nomination%29

Wikipedia have decided to delete their page on Climate Change Alarmism, in spite of the fact that more votes were cast to keep it than to merge or delete it combined.

Nov 28, 2011 at 7:27 AM | Unregistered CommenterDead Dog Bounce

Telegraph: Outlook fair for amateurs as Met Office releases data

I thought you needed bigger and Bigger and BIGGER supercomputers to predict anything ;-)

Nov 28, 2011 at 6:25 AM | Unregistered CommenterJiminy Cricket

Excellent comment from Colliemum on Booker's article today .

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/8917737/Is-the-global-warming-scare-the-greatest-delusion-in-history.html#disqus_thread

Why is there not one politician who stands up and screams from We[s]tminster that these devastating 'energy and Co2 saving programmes' must be stopped now?

The Team, as CG2 shows, have known for the last our or five years that there is no global warming deserving of these political measures.

Why are the MSM, why are politicians not doing their duty and inform us, the public?

Why, above all, is there nobody who uses the revelations of the BBC involvement to haul that Insitution over the coals, and basically takes their licence away because they have broken their remit of reporting without bias?

At first, I thought CG2 to be hilarious, showing the twisting, turning, malfeasance and plain wrongness admitted by The Team.

Now, that people have started to dig deeper, I am so angry about the deception, and the plain criminality of the whole lot that I think it is time to forcefully remove the Westminster Lot and the EUrocrats from their fleshpots.

We have no money to help the aged because the Treasury can't find 1.7 billion £ - but ten times as much is wasted on CO2 trading.

Nov 27, 2011 at 11:11 AM | Unregistered CommenterMessenger

Steve McIntyre appears on The Bolt Report to discuss Climategate 2

Youtube clip 4.07 m

Nov 27, 2011 at 10:50 AM | Unregistered Commentermatthu

Willis Eschenbach writes a very strongly worded open letter to Phil Jones:


Here’s my problem with all of this, Dr. Jones. You tried out a variety of claimed reasons for not responding to a request for your data. None of them were even remotely true. They were all intended to hide the fact that you didn’t know where the data was. Dave clearly spelled out the problem: “we don’t know which data belongs to which stations, right?”

You gave lots and lots of explanations to me, everything except the truth—that your records were in such disarray that you could not fulfill my request. It is clear now from the Climategate emails that some records were there, some were missing, the lists were not up to date, there was orphan data, some stations had multiple sets of data, some data was only identified by folder not by filename, you didn’t know which data might have been covered by confidentiality agreements, and the provenance of some datasets could not be established. The unfortunate reality was that you simply couldn’t do what I asked

Rather than just saying that, however, you came up with a host of totally bogus reasons why you could not give me the data. Those were lies, Phil. You and David Palmer flat-out lied to my face about why you couldn’t send me the data.

I’m writing because I will not endure your new duplicity in silence. Stop this foolish, futile attempt to rehabilitate your reputation. Your reputation is so shredded and utterly lost at this point that, crazily, I find that my heart goes out to your predicament, calling on you to stop with the mendacity and prevarication, give up on the justifications, and return to your science. Your continued lies only make it worse. Only an apology could possibly begin to rehabilitate your reputation, and you seem totally unwilling to do that.

Read the whole thing on WUWT

Nov 27, 2011 at 10:42 AM | Unregistered Commentermatthu

Climate loan sharks: how the UK is making developing countries pay twice for climate change


The World Development Movement reveals in a report that not only is the UK pushing useless technology onto some of the world's poorest nations it is doing so in the form of loans rather than grants with no expectation of their ever being repaid (sounds similar to government bailouts being forced onto the most bankrupt countries in the Euro area?) and which are in reality no more than an accountancy trick to make government indebtedness look better.

The UK decided it would make its contribution to the PPCR as a ‘capital grant’ in 2007. The UK does not require any of the money to be given back, however because it was given as capital this meant that it could be defined as investment rather than current spending. The purpose of this was that by defining it as investment, it created an asset and so made a lower contribution to government net borrowing (expenditure minus assets).34 Whilst the amount of money spent was the same, the way it was accounted for lowered government borrowing figures. The idea of climate loans was created by the UK Labour government as an accountancy trick to make its balance sheet look better.

Nov 27, 2011 at 10:21 AM | Unregistered Commentermatthu

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>