PDA

View Full Version : UN climate change panel based claims on student dissertation and magazine article



Eric Johnson
01-30-2010, 05:04 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7111525/UN-climate-change-panel-based-claims-on-student-dissertation-and-magazine-article.html

http://tinyurl.com/y8ku7pm

The United Nations' expert panel on climate change based claims about ice disappearing from the world's mountain tops on a student's dissertation and an article in a mountaineering magazine.

The revelation will cause fresh embarrassment for the The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which had to issue a humiliating apology earlier this month over inaccurate statements about global warming.

The IPCC's remit is to provide an authoritative assessment of scientific evidence on climate change.

However, it can be revealed that one of the sources quoted was a feature article published in a popular magazine for climbers which was based on anecdotal evidence from mountaineers about the changes they were witnessing on the mountainsides around them.

The other was a dissertation written by a geography student, studying for the equivalent of a master's degree, at the University of Berne in Switzerland that quoted interviews with mountain guides in the Alps.

-more-

Bayou Magic
01-30-2010, 05:30 PM
Don't worry. The EPA is moving ahead full speed with carbon emission regulation setting the ground work for cap and tax.

Carbon reduction is already mandatory for federal entities through E.O 13514 signed Oct 2009 by Obama. If you really want to get into the details, google it and check out scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions - scope 3 in particular. What a nightmare for those of us who have to report this to DC!

This is just the start. Lisa Jackson, the EPA Administrator, has already identified Climate Change as an agency priority. Get ready; without a change of direction and/or some strong opposition this is coming to the private sector near you complements of the O administration.

fp

Henry V
01-31-2010, 02:18 PM
I'll just throw in these facts:

In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that EPA has the authority to regulate CO2. I guess EPA is following up.

Cap and trade is a MARKET BASED approach to reducing CO2 emissions. The approach worked to reduce NOx and SOx emissions 20 years ago. It should work for CO2 also.

A great series of background articles on glaciers is available at http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Glaciers/

There is a good article on this at: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090129090002.htm
Here is one on US glaciers at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/aug/06/america-glacier-melt

Complete worldwide scientific data and references are available at: http://www.geo.unizh.ch/wgms/mbb/sum08.html
Where you will find summaries like this
http://www.geo.unizh.ch/wgms/mbb/mbb11/Fig1.jpg

Clearly, IPCC does not need to cite popular press articles when there is sooo much direct measurement and peer reviewed evidence is out there.

Is it just me or is this latest "controversy" another attack of the messenger with no attempt to refute or dispute the science.

Buzz
01-31-2010, 02:26 PM
Henry, thanks.

I was going to try and dig this stuff up, but I realized that given enough time, you'd see this thread and respond.

YardleyLabs
01-31-2010, 02:44 PM
Mountaineers, skiers and such were actually among the early warners of the acceleration in loss of land-based glacier mass. I heard it from friends skiing in areas such as Zermatt and Mont Blanc,where entire ski slopes have had to be shut down for much of the season that were previously open November to May. This has even been reported by that same Rupert Murdoch mouthpiece, The Telegraph (see, for example, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/731703/Climate-change-puts-skiing-at-risk.html).

Uncle Bill
01-31-2010, 05:02 PM
It will be interesting to see if the same 'elected' representatives have the onions to vote for this completely flawed 'science', that is being shoved down the electorates throats by the insane EPA director.

A new bill introducing a "resolution of disapproval" will soon be voted on. Even the Democrats originally voting for Waxman-Markey are deciding they have infuriated the voters at home, now that they realize how many jobs will be lost and how much more they will be paying for a regulatory dragnet covering every corner of the economy; Farms, schools, hospitals, nursing homes et al.

Of course even if the House and Senate pass this resolution, no one expects Obama to sign it. But that's OK, because then he will be seen by all as the true architect of this most recent push to tax the daylights out of every home-owner in the nation.

November can't come soon enough.

UB

Hew
02-01-2010, 01:40 AM
I'll just throw in these facts:

In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that EPA has the authority to regulate CO2. I guess EPA is following up.

Cap and trade is a MARKET BASED approach to reducing CO2 emissions. The approach worked to reduce NOx and SOx emissions 20 years ago. It should work for CO2 also.

A great series of background articles on glaciers is available at http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Glaciers/

There is a good article on this at: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090129090002.htm
Here is one on US glaciers at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/aug/06/america-glacier-melt

Complete worldwide scientific data and references are available at: http://www.geo.unizh.ch/wgms/mbb/sum08.html
Where you will find summaries like this
http://www.geo.unizh.ch/wgms/mbb/mbb11/Fig1.jpg

Clearly, IPCC does not need to cite popular press articles when there is sooo much direct measurement and peer reviewed evidence is out there.

Is it just me or is this latest "controversy" another attack of the messenger with no attempt to refute or dispute the science.
You sure spend a lot of time trying to entertain us, Henry. ;-)

Henry V
02-01-2010, 11:00 AM
Yes, I do what I can to entertain. I do not think it is generally appreciated around here though.

I am surprised that you would consider five minutes "a lot of time"?

What is the phrase.... "I/we report, you decide"

I was kinda thinking someone might take exception to the fact that cap and trade is a market based approach. Of course, that discussion would take more than five minutes.

paul young
02-01-2010, 11:23 AM
You sure spend a lot of time trying to entertain us, Henry. ;-)


not sure how much time it takes him, but he manages to do it with about 30% of the verbage used by his antagonist, and actually provides links to research that has been done on the subject being discussed......-Paul