Jump to content
CaddyInfo Cadillac Forum

Global Warming


Recommended Posts

solarcycle_soho.jpg

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap071203.html

Explanation: Every eleven years, our Sun goes through a solar cycle. A complete solar cycle has now been imaged by the sun-orbiting SOHO spacecraft, celebrating the 12th anniversary of its launch yesterday. A solar cycle is caused by the changing magnetic field of the Sun, and varies from solar maximum, when sunspot, coronal mass ejection, and flare phenomena are most frequent, to solar minimum, when such activity is relatively infrequent. Solar minimums occurred in 1996 and 2007, while the last solar maximum occurred in 2001. This picture is composed of a SOHO image of the Sun in extreme ultraviolet light for each year of the last solar cycle, with images picked to illustrate the relative activity of the Sun

July2008lowsolaractivity.jpg

Shot taken July 30, 2008

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080730.html

Explanation: That's no sunspot. It's the International Space Station (ISS) caught by chance passing in front of the Sun. Sunspots, individually, have a dark central umbra, a lighter surrounding penumbra, and no solar panels. By contrast, the ISS is a complex and multi-spired mechanism, one of the largest and most sophisticated machines ever created by humanity. Also, sunspots occur on the Sun, whereas the ISS orbits the Earth. Transiting the Sun is not very unusual for the ISS, which orbits the Earth about every 90 minutes, but getting one's timing and equipment just right for a great image is rare. Strangely, besides that fake spot, the Sun, last week, lacked any real sunspots. Sunspots have been rare on the Sun since the dawn of the current Solar Minimum, a period of low solar activity. Although fewer sunspots have been recorded during this Solar Minimum than for many previous decades, the low solar activity is not, as yet, very unusual.

Given the above information here is great information about solar minimums and solar maximums and their impact on temperature

Here is some VERY interesting information that makes you realize that the global warming proponents are way off base. Compare the information at this link to the 11 year sun cycle above, we are now in a solar minimum.

<a href="http://www.john-daly.com/solar.htm" target="_blank">http://www.john-daly.com/solar.htm</a>

Pre-1995 - DTC codes OBD1  >>

1996 and newer - DTC codes OBD2 >> https://www.obd-codes.com/trouble_codes/gm/obd_codes.htm

How to check for codes Caddyinfo How To Technical Archive >> http://www.caddyinfo.com/wordpress/cadillac-how-to-faq/

Cadillac History & Specifications Year by Year  http://www.motorera.com/cadillac/index.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

This happened close to the solar maximum in 2000

This shot was taken March 9, 2000

febcme_sohoc2.jpg

Explanation: Late last month another erupting filament lifted off the active solar surface and blasted this enormous bubble of magnetic plasma into space. Direct light from the sun is blocked in this picture of the event with the sun's relative position and size indicated by a white half circle at bottom center. The field of view extends 2 million kilometers or more from the solar surface. While hints of these explosive events, called coronal mass ejections or CMEs, were discovered by spacecraft in the early 70s this dramatic image is part of a detailed record of this CME's development from the presently operating SOlar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) spacecraft. Near the minimum of the solar activity cycle CMEs occur about once a week, but as we approach solar maximum rates of two or more per day are anticipated. Though this CME was clearly not headed for Earth, strong CMEs are seen to profoundly influence space weather, and those directed toward our planet and can have serious effects

Who in their right mind DOES NOT think that these types of events don't affect the earth's temperature?

Pre-1995 - DTC codes OBD1  >>

1996 and newer - DTC codes OBD2 >> https://www.obd-codes.com/trouble_codes/gm/obd_codes.htm

How to check for codes Caddyinfo How To Technical Archive >> http://www.caddyinfo.com/wordpress/cadillac-how-to-faq/

Cadillac History & Specifications Year by Year  http://www.motorera.com/cadillac/index.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

equinoxprom_eit_big.jpg

Taken 9/23/1999

Explanation: Today, the Sun crosses the celestial equator and seasons change from Summer to Fall in the north and Winter to Spring in the southern hemisphere. Defined by the Sun's position in sky the event is known as an equinox - the length of daylight is equal to the length of night. Just last week the active Sun produced the dramatic eruptive prominence seen in this extreme ultraviolet picture from the space-based SOHO observatory. The hot plasma is lofted above the solar surface by twisting magnetic fields. How big is the prominence? Click on the image to view the larger full-sun picture. At the same scale, planet Earth would likely still appear smaller than your cursor

Pre-1995 - DTC codes OBD1  >>

1996 and newer - DTC codes OBD2 >> https://www.obd-codes.com/trouble_codes/gm/obd_codes.htm

How to check for codes Caddyinfo How To Technical Archive >> http://www.caddyinfo.com/wordpress/cadillac-how-to-faq/

Cadillac History & Specifications Year by Year  http://www.motorera.com/cadillac/index.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have ever played with iron filings and a magnet as a child, you have seen how you can make the filings stand on edge and wiggle with the magnet... Here is that concept on a larger more powerful scale

Look at this sun spot close up, the plasma is pushed aside and bent bad from a magnetic field. How much power is needed to do this?

sunspot_vtt.jpg

Explanation: Sometimes, small regions of the Sun appear unusually dark. Visible above is a close-up picture of a sunspot, a depression on the Sun's face that is slightly cooler and less luminous than the rest of the Sun. The Sun's complex magnetic field creates this cool region by inhibiting hot material from entering the spot. :oSunspots can be larger than the Earth and typically last for only a few days. This high-resolution picture also shows clearly that the Sun's face is a bubbling sea of separate cells of hot gas. These cells are known as granules. A solar granule is about 1000 kilometers across and lasts about 10 minutes. After that, many granules end up exploding.

Pre-1995 - DTC codes OBD1  >>

1996 and newer - DTC codes OBD2 >> https://www.obd-codes.com/trouble_codes/gm/obd_codes.htm

How to check for codes Caddyinfo How To Technical Archive >> http://www.caddyinfo.com/wordpress/cadillac-how-to-faq/

Cadillac History & Specifications Year by Year  http://www.motorera.com/cadillac/index.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike,

That was some really neat stuff!

I only wish you had continued to supply attribution in posts 2 through 4 as you did in post 1. Stuff like that makes it easier on those of us who'd like to use this info beyond this forum. Oh, and let's not forget, our sun also undergoes an 11,000 year cycle and even a few more at greater intervals.

At the risk of inferring what you did not imply, I'm guessing you might be laying the groundwork for an assault on the "global warming" folk. I might be one of them, but I'm not yet committed. It strikes me as plausible that a few bajillion pounds of CO2 anthropogenically pumped into our atmosphere might just have some effect.

OTOH, this current scare is brought to us by people with a high profile socio-political agenda who have in the past favored us with woefully similar scares such as global cooling, global drought, global famine, global over population etc. All gone by the wayside. The scientific community lives and dies by grants. Currently "the money" is in global warming. It saddens me to think that community may have been corrupted; nonetheless, it's something I must consider.

For now, I'm ignoring the political crowd (on both sides) and paying close attention to the political bent of those who comment in the scientific community.

Regards,

Warren

Posted Image

There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I agree, my post #1 was self contained, and I almost stopped at that point, because it was a full thought.

I was laying out in the sun today, and it occured to me how powerful the sun must be for me to feel that heat. It is obvious to me, that if the sun got hotter, and gave off CME at a greater rate, that it would be logical that our temps would be affected.

But what my posts #2 through #4 were trying to show was how incredibly powerful and huge and violent the sun is. It is especially violent during the solar maximum which we just came out of. Anyone notice that this has not been a really hot summer?

Why NASA has not commented on this, is beyone me, unless they are concerned that their funding will be pulled if they speak against political issues.

Pre-1995 - DTC codes OBD1  >>

1996 and newer - DTC codes OBD2 >> https://www.obd-codes.com/trouble_codes/gm/obd_codes.htm

How to check for codes Caddyinfo How To Technical Archive >> http://www.caddyinfo.com/wordpress/cadillac-how-to-faq/

Cadillac History & Specifications Year by Year  http://www.motorera.com/cadillac/index.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Global Warming on the Cover of Rolling Stone

Thursday , November 10, 2005

By Steven Milloy

You may remember the 1970s song “On the Cover of Rolling Stone” by Dr. Hook & the Medicine Show, especially the catchy lyrics, “Wanna see my picture on the cover, Wanna buy five copies for my mother…”

Well I didn’t make the cover of the Nov. 17 Rolling Stone (Billie Joe Armstrong of the rock group Green Day did) but I did get my picture in a pretty exclusive gallery that also featured President Bush; ExxonMobil CEO Lee Raymond; author Michael Crichton; Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.); and the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s global warming point man Myron Ebell.

Rolling Stone knocked the six of us as the “leading debunkers” of global warming, while heaping praise on its “Warriors & Heroes: Twenty-five Leaders Who Are Fighting to Stave Off Planetwide Catastrophe.”

Just who are some of these “warriors” and “heroes”? While you’ll find quick takes on all of them at JunkScience.com, we’ll focus here on those “heroes” who have scientific credentials.

Rolling Stone calls NASA scientist James Hansen the “Paul Revere” of global warming as it was Hansen who famously sounded the alarm about global warming in his 1988 testimony before Congress.

But Dr. Hansen’s predictions of global temperature increases have also been famously wrong. While Dr. Hansen predicted a 0.34 degrees Centigrade rise in average global temperatures during the 1990s, actual surface temperatures rose by only one-third as much (0.11 degrees Centigrade) and lower atmosphere temperatures actually declined. At least the real Paul Revere was right -- the British did come.

Dr. Robert Watson is extolled as “The Messenger” by Rolling Stone. Watson is lauded for leading the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in concluding that humans have already warmed the planet and that the Earth’s temperature will rise by as much as 10 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100.

But as pointed out in this column previously, the sort of crystal ball climate modeling that the IPCC report relies on has never been validated against historical temperatures, so it’s difficult to take its predictions of future temperatures too seriously.

Moreover, global warming theory and its climate models say that atmospheric temperature increases should be 30 percent greater than surface temperature increases, but they’re not -- they’re actually less.

As chairman of the IPCC, Watson was responsible for propagating the myth that only 1 or 2 percent of scientists did not believe humans were responsible for global warming. Watson, of course, overlooked at least 17,000 scientists who signed a petition cautioning against global warming alarmism – a petition compiled with the assistance of former National Academy of Sciences (NAS) president Dr. Frederick Seitz.

The global warming “Hardballer” is the current NAS president Dr. Ralph Cicerone who earned Rolling Stone’s admiration for supposedly “facing down” global warming skeptics in a NAS report on the subject.

Perhaps political hardball is Dr. Cicerone’s strength – but it’s not clear that climate science is. Dr. Fred Singer describes Dr. Cicerone as an atmospheric chemist who should have won the Nobel Prize 30 years ago for his work on the possible destruction of stratospheric ozone by chlorine. But Cicerone is no climate scientist, according to Dr. Singer, and his July 2005 testimony before Congress proves it.

“While paying lip service to uncertainties, [Dr. Cicerone] managed leave the impression of a substantial 20th-century human-caused warming [while] ignoring the cooling between 1940 and 1975 that has always created problems for advocates of anthropogenic global warming.

Virginia State climatologist Dr. Pat Michaels also had much say about Cicerone’s congressional testimony – or rather much to say about what Cicerone omitted to say.

Then there’s the “Tide Turner,” Dr. Robert Corell who Rolling Stone cites for chairing the alarmist report known as the “Arctic Climate Impact Assessment.”

But Corell’s “polar bear scare” was on thin ice when I wrote about it in this column ] and remains so one year later – all you need do is to look at the data.

Rolling Stone’s “Visionary” is Amory Lovins, a proponent of hydrogen fuel cells. But at least some in the alternative energy crowd have a different take on Lovins. In an article for the Alternative Energy Action Network entitled, “Amory Lovins Misleads with Numbers,” Arthur Miller criticized a recent Lovins article in Scientific American on energy efficiency and hydrogen fuel cells for “[throwing] a lot of numbers around, but far too many of the ones he provides are irrelevant, meaningless, or misleading.”

As you may guess, I’m very pleased that Rolling Stone chose to pit the six “leading debunkers” (there are actually many more prominent debunkers that Rolling Stone overlooked) against its 25 “warriors and heroes” -- a group that, ironically, makes the case against global warming hysteria quite well. That’s ample compensation for not making the cover of Rolling Stone.

Steven Milloy publishes JunkScience.com and CSRwatch.com, is adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, and is the author of Junk Science Judo: Self-defense Against Health Scares and Scams (Cato Institute, 2001).

Pre-1995 - DTC codes OBD1  >>

1996 and newer - DTC codes OBD2 >> https://www.obd-codes.com/trouble_codes/gm/obd_codes.htm

How to check for codes Caddyinfo How To Technical Archive >> http://www.caddyinfo.com/wordpress/cadillac-how-to-faq/

Cadillac History & Specifications Year by Year  http://www.motorera.com/cadillac/index.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike,

Aw, c'mon Mike; you just did it again.

Please include a direct link to articles you post. Please. You know I'm lazy! :rolleyes:

Regards,

Warren

Posted Image

There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is obvious to me, that if the sun got hotter, and gave off CME at a greater rate, that it would be logical that our temps would be affected.

Not so. It's important to note that CMEs are directional; the likelyhood of our planet being in the path of such a phenomenon is incredibly small. Were we to find ourselves in the path of a CME (with very little notice) the results would be disastrous.

CMEs explode in a myriad of directions that do not include Earth in their path.

Regards,

Warren

Posted Image

There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a weekly update on sunspot numbers, the ARRL has a handy reference on this page http://www.arrl.org/

Scroll down and you will find "The K7RA Solar Update" which is of interest to amateur radio operators as it pertains to HF band radio propogation conditions. We have been at very low sunpsot numbers for some time now; low as in 0.

Jim

Drive your car.

Use your cell phone.

CHOOSE ONE !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we need to brace ourselves. As the summer nears its end we begin to see also the end of hurricane season approaching. As in years past we were warned this year about an abnormally large number of severe hurricanes. "They" were wrong in years past (let me count the ways), but what if they're right about this year? We'll need to see some lollipaloozers (and real soon) to successfully meet the prediction. Watch out!

Oh, and remember the predictions about the Arctic, "for the first time," being ice free by the end of this summer? Well the Arctic melt is nearly at its end and the ice extent is now 10% greater than it was this time last year. Go figure.

It's also interesting to note that there has been open water at the pole in recent memory.

post-416-1219695524_thumb.jpg

Posted Image

There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we need to brace ourselves. As the summer nears its end we begin to see also the end of hurricane season approaching. As in years past we were warned this year about an abnormally large number of severe hurricanes. "They" were wrong in years past (let me count the ways), but what if they're right about this year? We'll need to see some lollipaloozers (and real soon) to successfully meet the prediction. Watch out!

Gustav will qualify as a lollipaloozer.

Jim

Drive your car.

Use your cell phone.

CHOOSE ONE !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Here is an interesting article

Reference: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/f...ed-al-gore.aspx

Peter Foster: The man who doubted Al Gore

Posted: August 28, 2009, 10:23 PM by NP Editor

Peter Foster, climate change, Al Gore

To dissent on the man-made global warming ‘consensus’ is seen as evidence of mental deficiency

By Peter Foster

Dealing with acolytes of the Al Gore school of climate change (that is, virtually every government on earth, plus the chattering classes of the entire Western World) has always reminded me of a classic series of illustrations by Australian-born British cartoonist H. M. Bateman.

Mr. Bateman’s “Man Who…” series depicted people falling about, jaws dropping and eyes popping, while the surrounding buildings literally shook as some poor fool made a monumental social gaffe. They included “The Man Who Missed the Ball on the First Tee at St. Andrews,” and “The Man Who Lit His Cigar Before the Royal Toast.”

If one were to think of current candidates for the most disastrous of faux pas, surely none could be greater than “The Man Who Expressed Skepticism About Catastrophic Man-made Global Warming.” Not merely do mouths gape, but eyes roll at any dimwit’s failure to grasp that there is “consensus” on the issue. Indeed, to dissent is seen not merely as evidence of mental deficiency but moral turpitude.

I once attended a dinner party thrown by a corporate executive who — like his guests — was astonished at my apostasy, which was met by the requisite mime show of shock from other guests. The following day he e-mailed me a news item about melting Arctic ice. That, presumably, would put me straight.

Earlier this year I wrote an article for The Walrus magazine on the great Scottish philosopher and father of economics Adam Smith. I made a passing reference to the fact that Smith, as a student of the scientific method, might be skeptical about the notion that any science was “settled.” A letter was subsequently published in which a correspondent replied, somewhat testily: “[W]hat special qualifications does Foster have to assess the validity of climate change theory?... [W]e are being told by people who have spent their whole lives studying climate change that we need to be concerned, and that’s good enough for me.”

I entirely appreciate his point. We rely on authority for the vast majority of what we believe, but global warming theory does not rank as knowledge of the same order as whether Iceland exists or the moon is made of green cheese. My reason for believing in the existence of Iceland is that a conspiracy to conjure it out of geographical thin air is passing unlikely. But anthropogenic global warming is different. Far from being an established fact, it is a hypothesis whose allegedly disastrous consequences will occur sometime in the relatively distant future. It also comes attached to considerable psychic satisfactions and political advantages for its promoters.

It conforms to a broad view — long and fondly promoted by fans of Big Government — that capitalism is essentially short-sighted and greed-driven (just look at the subprime crisis!). This stance is not merely appealing to activist politicians and bureaucrats, it is pure gold for the vast and growing army of radical NGO environmental lobby groups, whose raison d’être — and fundraising — are closely related to the degree to which nature is seen to be “endangered.” It is also appealing to rent seeking businessmen who see the profit potential in the vast array of controls and subsidies.

Nevertheless, most ordinary people reasonably imagine in the face of such a weight of “authority” that the case must be closed. It isn’t. For a start, the weight of authority is based on the political doctoring of studies that are in any case designed to countenance no other conclusion than that man-made carbon dioxide drives the climate. Moreover, the very fact that the theory’s promoters are so reluctant to actually engage in scientific debate (No time to talk. Must act!) is highly suspicious.

However, once you get people believing in “authority,” then you’re pretty much home and dry. Authority relieves us of the anxiety of uncertainty and the pain of thought. If the issue can also be portrayed as “moral” (millions of poor people dying from biblical droughts and floods!) then to question it is not merely cause for rejection but censure. Skeptics must be either crackpots or in the pay of Big Oil or Big Coal.

I recently had what I tried to make a level-headed exchange with somebody who was visibly agitated at my daring to quote science, facts and sources. This person — dredging up material from the conventional noosphere — finally told me that I was like “a holocaust denier,” or somebody who believed in UFOs! Their conviction, like the Walrus correspondent, was based on the fact that “Nobel prize winners” had declared that catastrophic global warming was a fact.

Now it’s certainly true that Al Gore has a Nobel, but it is equally certain that it isn’t for science. The nations of the world are currently involved — ahead of the next giant climate shindig in Copenhagen in December — in rancorous discussions about sharing the economic self-mutilations that are claimed to be needed as part of a successor to the egregiously-failed Kyoto Accord. No issue has more divided the rich and poor, and pitted the West against India and China.

In case you don’t remember, the Nobel that Al Gore shared with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was for Peace. But mentioning that massive incongruity would probably cause people’s eyes to roll, or maybe even buildings to shake.

For more from this author, visit the FP Comment blog | Subscribe to feed

Pre-1995 - DTC codes OBD1  >>

1996 and newer - DTC codes OBD2 >> https://www.obd-codes.com/trouble_codes/gm/obd_codes.htm

How to check for codes Caddyinfo How To Technical Archive >> http://www.caddyinfo.com/wordpress/cadillac-how-to-faq/

Cadillac History & Specifications Year by Year  http://www.motorera.com/cadillac/index.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question authority. Follow the money. Where are the numbers?

Why is Common Sense... so... uncommon?

CTS-V_LateralGs_6-2018_tiny.jpg
-- Click Here for CaddyInfo page on "How To" Read Your OBD Codes
-- Click Here for my personal page to download my OBD code list as an Excel file, plus other Cadillac data
-- See my CaddyInfo car blogs: 2011 CTS-V, 1997 ETC
Yes, I was Jims_97_ETC before I changed cars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It remains that we must caution ourselves regarding "warming."

There remains the possibility that the proponents of "warming" have a political agenda attached to it. Maybe not. Your opinion is welcome.

I don't have an absolute answer, but I'm suspicious of those folk who have, in the past (with possibly political motives) advocated global warming, cooling, draught, over-population, etc, etc.

Weren't they wrong each time?

When will these folk, "fearful" of fear, stop invoking folk just to put an end to it?

Regards,

Warren

Posted Image

There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is Common Sense... so... uncommon?

Why, indeed.

Regards,

Warren

Posted Image

There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a "skeptic" I enjoy visiting sites such as http://www.theskepticsguide.org .

However, these folk view conservatives as something akin to neanderthals. Moreover, any consideration that AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) is not real and happening NOW is cavalierly dismissed.

I wouldn't DARE comment there without a bullet-proof umbrella.

As I noted earlier, a huge amount of money is invested in the AGW hypothesis. Billion$, in fact.

Further, a lot of political capital is also invested there.

Whatever you might feel about AGW, you should make yourself aware that folk with an agenda are trying to get your attention and drum your brain. Investigate and make intelligent decisions you might call your own.

In addition, you needn't make a decision this instant. There is plenty of time for that.

Regards,

Warren

Posted Image

There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I found this today at American Thinker. This confirms that the global warming alarmists are FRAUDS

If this is hard to follow here is the link http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/the...mate_fraud.html

November 21, 2009

The Evidence of Climate Fraud

By Marc Sheppard

A folder containing documents, data and emails purportedly "hacked" from Britain's Climate Research Unit (CRU) may be smoking gun proof of a worldwide conspiracy to exaggerate the existence, causation and threat of global warming. And the list of apparent conspirators includes many of the world's leading climate alarmists -- the very scientists on whose work the entire anthropogenic global warming theory is based.

In a Friday interview with Investigative Magazine's TGIF edition, CRU director Phillip Jones confirmed [PDF] that the incriminating documents, which have been widely disseminated online, are in fact genuine. Accordingly, whether indeed the labor of hackers, or instead that of a CRU whistleblower, the contents of the FOI2009 folder are now public record -- and that's nothing short of dynamite.

After all, the names of the email exchangers represent a who's who of the world's leading climate alarmism scientists, including Stephen Schneider, Gavin Schmidt and James Hansen. And the words within seemingly betray an organized apparatus of deception.

In one particularly odious email dated November 1999, Jones writes to Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley and Malcolm Hughes:

"I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."

Now, these are the same Mann, Bradley and Hughes whose MBH98 reconstruction (aka the "Hockey Stick" graph) -- which deceitfully depicts last millennium's global temperatures as flat prior to a dramatic upturn last century -- remains the poster-child of global warming hysteria despite being thoroughly debunked. And here we find Jones writing the three the following year admitting to using Mann's "trick" to "hide" a temperature decline.

Not surprisingly, the Keith mentioned is none other than CRU's own Keith Briffa, another Hockey-Team leader, whose temperature graphs, derived from Yamal, Russia tree ring data, were cited by the IPCC as supporting evidence of MBH's assertion of unprecedented 20th century warming. But as we reported at the time -- that buttress crumbled last month when Briffa's results were proven to stand no more reliably than Mann's.

Ultimately, neither reconstruction attained its alarmist-imperative-goal of proving today’s global temperatures to be unprecedented. Despite repeated fraudulent efforts to demonstrate otherwise, 20th century highs remain documented as several degrees cooler than those of the Medieval Warming Period of 900-1300 AD. Bad news for the mankind-stinks crowd in general. Worse news for those actually involved in this devious deception.

Both Mann and Briffa had been challenged for years to produce their data, methods and source code by Climate Audit's Steve McIntyre. Both ignored the tenets of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) McIntyre cited, and fought every effort to induce their coming clean. And actually not without good reason -- last month CRU was effectively forced to release the Yamal data, whereupon an analysis by McIntyre proved that Briffa et al. had cherry-picked and manipulated data, intentionally omitting records not friendly to their position.

And we now know that on the very day our expose of the Briffa scandal, UN Climate Reports: They Lie, appeared here at AT, Jones forwarded this email response from Tom Wigley of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research to Briffa: [my emphasis]

It is distressing to read that American Stinker item. But Keith does seem to have got himself into a mess. As I pointed out in emails, Yamal is insignificant. And you say that (contrary to what M&M say) Yamal is *not* used in MBH, etc. So these facts alone are enough to shoot down M&M is a few sentences (which surely is the only way to go - complex and wordy responses will be counter productive). But, more generally, (even if it *is* irrelevant) how does Keith explain the McIntyre plot that compares Yamal-12 with Yamal-all? And how does he explain the apparent "selection" of the less well-replicated chronology rather that the later (better replicated) chronology?

Of course, I don't know how often Yamal-12 has really been used in recent, post-1995, work. I suspect from what you say it is much less often that M&M say - but where did they get their information? I presume they went thru papers to see if Yamal was cited, a pretty foolproof method if you ask me. Perhaps these things can be explained clearly and concisely - but I am not sure Keith is able to do this as he is too close to the issue and probably quite pissed of.

And the issue of with-holding data is still a hot potato, one that affects both you and Keith (and Mann). Yes, there are reasons - but many *good* scientists appear to be unsympathetic to these. The trouble here is that with-holding data looks like hiding something, and hiding means (in some eyes) that it is bogus science that is being hidden.

I think Keith needs to be very, very careful in how he handles this. I'd be willing to check over anything he puts together.

Tom.

Beyond his sophomoric cheap shot at this fine publication’s highly regarded name, Wigley admitted that McIntyre’s comparison of “Yamal-12 with Yamal-all” implied a "selection" of data on the part of Briffa. Yet his concern was not one of scientific integrity, but instead that Briffa may not be up to the task of properly “explaining” the data cherry-picking as he is “too close to the issue and probably quite pissed of[f].” And while offering his assistance in the cover up, imploring caution as “in some eyes” it might appear they’re hiding “bogus science,” Wigley actually defended the practice of withholding data.

Perchance the hitherto sequestered April 2007 document entitled jones-foiathoughts.doc, concerning reactions to FOIA inquiries might lend some insight into CRU’s atrocious reporting policies. Within, Jones lists 3 options to such requests. As an alternative to the first of actual compliance, he suggests he and his coconspirators might “send them a subset removing station data from some of the countries” and “remove many of the early stations that we coded up in the 1980s.” Or perhaps “send them the raw data as is, by reconstructing it from GHCN (Global Historical Climatology Network),” adding that “this would be the raw data, but it would annoy them.”

Amazing. And yet -- but the tip of the seasonally advancing iceberg. Communiqués suborning subterfuge abound here, including one from May of 2008 in which Jones actually exhorts Mann to “delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4” and to entreat others to perform likewise. Was this in fact a fourth (and likely illegal) Jones option for dealing with McIntyre’s FOIA requests?

There appear to be thousands of emails, documents, reports, and data files to review here. So I’m sure this fledgling story will continue to evolve as greater minds than mine analyze them throughout the weekend. For those sporting taste buds leaning toward the technical, rest assured that both Climate Audit and Watts Up With That will certainly be whetting those appetites until properly sated. Needless to say, look no further than American Thinker for continuing political analysis. And for those of you wishing to join in this criminal investigation, the FOI2009 folder is available for download here.

Criminal? Oh yes, indeed. As this mock-science serves as justification for Trillions of dollars in imposed and proposed new taxes, liens, fees and rate hikes, not to mention the absurd wealth-redistribution premise of international climate debt “reparations,” such manipulation of evidence should be treated as exactly what it is – larceny on the grandest scale in history.

Sorry Al – the science hasn’t been settled, it’s merely been meddled

Pre-1995 - DTC codes OBD1  >>

1996 and newer - DTC codes OBD2 >> https://www.obd-codes.com/trouble_codes/gm/obd_codes.htm

How to check for codes Caddyinfo How To Technical Archive >> http://www.caddyinfo.com/wordpress/cadillac-how-to-faq/

Cadillac History & Specifications Year by Year  http://www.motorera.com/cadillac/index.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that it proves that global warming as a whole is a fraud, but it certainly proves that Britain's Climate Research Unit is suppressing and perhaps falsifying public information that could contradict the global warming theory. The fact that this could happen in so prestigious an institution also proves that protection of the global warming theory -- and agenda -- is of the highest priority of those who have committed to it.

This is the latest and greatest of a growing set of cracks in the facade of the global warming "consensus." My feeling is that you can find the real impetus behind most things by following the money. Do a web search on the Kyoto Protocols and look at the financial structure behind the global warming politics, and see who has something to gain -- or perhaps a lot to gain. When things get to large amounts of money changing hands without changing anything relevant, all credibility goes away and things like the revelation we see here are no surprise to me.

CTS-V_LateralGs_6-2018_tiny.jpg
-- Click Here for CaddyInfo page on "How To" Read Your OBD Codes
-- Click Here for my personal page to download my OBD code list as an Excel file, plus other Cadillac data
-- See my CaddyInfo car blogs: 2011 CTS-V, 1997 ETC
Yes, I was Jims_97_ETC before I changed cars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm as confused as the next person about AGW.

BUTTT. . . : This theory has been brought to us by the same folk who previously brought us global cooling, drought, over population, etc. You shouldn't have any difficulty understanding why I'm suspicious.

There are literally tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars changing hands due to this controversy. Its a money wagon. One of its size needs scrutiny. With this amount of money at stake I'm surprised no one has yet discovered a Mafia connection.

Regards,

Warren

Posted Image

There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you guys had it right, follow the money!

link to article > http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/cru...mate_alarm.html

CRU Files Betray Climate Alarmists' Funding Hypocrisy

By Marc Sheppard

It seems that while scientists who accept funding from oil companies are branded as bought-and-paid-for shills, those financed by renewable energy interests remain unchallenged authorities in their fields. Words can’t adequately express my astonishment.

Amid the thousands of files apparently misappropriated from Britain’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) last week sit two documents on the subject of the unit’s funding. One is a spreadsheet (pdj_grant_since1990.xls) logging the various grants CRU chief PD Jones has received since 1990. It lists 55 such endowments from agencies ranging from the U.S Department of Energy to NATO and worth a total of £13,718,547 or approximately 22.6 million USD. I guess cooking climate data can be an expensive habit, particularly for an oft-quoted and highly exalted U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) chief climatologist.

But it’s actually the second document (potential-funding.doc) that tells the more compelling tale. In addition to four government sources of potential CRU funding, it lists an equal number of “energy agencies” they might put the bite on. Three -- the Carbon Trust, the Northern Energy Initiative and the Energy Saving Trust -- are UK-based consultancy and funding specialists promoting “new energy” technologies with the goal of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. The fourth -- Renewables North West -- is an American company promoting the expansion of solar, wind and geothermal energy in the Pacific Northwest.

Needless to say, all four of these CRU “potential funding sources” have an undeniably intrinsic financial interest in the promotion of the carbochondriacal reports CRU is ready, willing, and able to dish out ostensibly on-demand. And equally obvious is that Jones is all too aware that a renewable energy-funded CRU will remain the world’s premiere authority on the subject of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) despite any appearance of conflict.

And yet, no such latitude has ever been extended to scientists in the skeptical camp.

For instance, when MIT’s Richard Lindzen delivers one of his trademark brilliant presentations leading to the conclusion that climate sensitivity for a doubling of CO2 is about 0.5°C, not the 1.5°-5°C predicted by IPCC models, all we hear from alarmists and complicit media types is that the professor once charged oil and coal interests $2,500 a day for his consulting services and is therefore an unreliable big-oil hack.

Or when S. Fred Singer challenges the IPCC to explain whether water vapor and clouds represent positive or negative feedback or stands before a graph depicted temperatures decreasing over the past 10 years while CO2 climbed and declares that “the relationship is meaningless,” his words are similarly dismissed based solely on the fact that he has received funding from ExxonMobil.

Let’s set aside the fact that Lindzen had actually accepted a total of $10,000 in expenses and expert witness fees from such interests on the day he ceased such activities two decades ago. And that Singer has received only $20,000 from ExxonMobil. And that climate realists are out-funded by alarmists by several orders of magnitude, which leads to the artificial expansion of the number of scientists who appear to support alarmist views. And even that monies paid to either side of the debate have zero impact on the science of whether or not 20th century warming was caused or exacerbated by manmade CO2 emissions. And don’t get me started on carbon-millionaire Al Gore.

The issue is this – Just how is it that funding from renewable energy interests evades charges of bias yet subsidies from traditional power entities scream bloody-conflict when each is equally friendly to the recipient’s cause?

As with all things AGW, the alarmist quick-draw-canard that the science is settled but for a few outlying scientists in the pockets of the fossil-fuel industry is quickly losing whatever civic support it may have had. And the scientific subterfuge surfaced last week by the CRU emails and documents represents but the latest of many recent outrages sure to accelerate the ongoing public awakening to the hoax which has been perpetrated upon them.

In the broader scheme, the credibility blow the IPCC will likely suffer because the majority of those data manipulation revealing emails flowed from the fingertips of its senior authors and editors will weaken and perhaps ultimately break the AGW orthodoxy spine its politically-charged assessments have erected. And that can only serve to further declaw their fellow alarmists and media minions – which of course would be nothing short of stupendous.

For as Lord Christopher Monckton emphasized in his rousing speech to close the second International Conference on Climate Change in New York City last March:

“There is no climate crisis. There was no climate crisis. There will be no climate crisis.”

And it has become abundantly clear that it is not, nor was it ever, the AGW skeptics who have been the liers. Or the cheaters.

Or the bought-and-paid-for hypocrites.

Pre-1995 - DTC codes OBD1  >>

1996 and newer - DTC codes OBD2 >> https://www.obd-codes.com/trouble_codes/gm/obd_codes.htm

How to check for codes Caddyinfo How To Technical Archive >> http://www.caddyinfo.com/wordpress/cadillac-how-to-faq/

Cadillac History & Specifications Year by Year  http://www.motorera.com/cadillac/index.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope I am not beating a dead horse here, I am attempting to put all pertinent information in one location on this subject and this article adds quite a bit of information

See this link as it has live links > http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/1...pers_conti.html

November 22, 2009

Warming's 'Pentagon Papers' continues to unravel the fraud.

Clarice Feldman

Charles Martin, writing at Pajamas Media has done an incredible job in sorting through the material from the CRU computers put online and is making sense of it. He says the material appears authentic (and to date no one has disputed its authenticity), "incendiary," and predicts they will have a seismic impact on the scientific community, shaking the foundations of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) and the reputations of a number of scientists who were the principle proponents of that theory.

Each of his conclusions is supported by the reference numbers of the online documents which support it. For example:

•The emails suggest the authors co-operated covertly to ensure that only papers favorable to CO2-forced AGW were published, and that editors and journals publishing contrary papers were punished. They also attempted to "discipline" scientists and journalists who published skeptical information.

See for example emails 1047388489, 1256765544, 1255352257, 1051190249, 1210367056, 1249503274, 1054756929, 1106322460 and 1132094873. Also see email 1139521913, in which the author discusses how the comments at RealClimate.org are moderated to prevent skeptical or critical comments from being published. RealClimate advertises itself as a scientific blog that attempts to present the "real case" for AGW.

This is a very important piece of work and if you care to understand why this matter is so important and what it's all about, you cannot do better than reading this piece.

Pre-1995 - DTC codes OBD1  >>

1996 and newer - DTC codes OBD2 >> https://www.obd-codes.com/trouble_codes/gm/obd_codes.htm

How to check for codes Caddyinfo How To Technical Archive >> http://www.caddyinfo.com/wordpress/cadillac-how-to-faq/

Cadillac History & Specifications Year by Year  http://www.motorera.com/cadillac/index.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I remain skeptical, there are some thoughts to ponder here:

HUGE potential story developing... important global warming data faked

http://www.thedailycrux.com/content/3448/Global_warming/eml

Posted Image

There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/24/e...n_n_370022.html

Ed Begley Jr. Flips Out On Fox: Climate Change Is Real (VIDEO)

Bruce

2023 Cadillac CT4-V Blackwing

Follow me on: Twitter Instagram Youtube

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was a staged show-biz funfest, about as predictable as what happens when you put to gamecocks on a ring. But good, anyway. All smoke, no light.

It's interesting that Begly kept driving home that papers written in peer-reviewed journalists by "people with Ph.D. after their name" and further insisted that their doctorates be in "climate science" after Varney cited a Ph.D. in Physics...

These arguments were pointless. The emails impugned the peer review process and the published papers in the whole field of global warming. Climate and weather modeling is often headed up by physicists and people with original degrees other root disciplines. Varney never got so far as to say what his authority had said, or what his real credentials might be.

So, nothing was proved. But, a good time was had by all.

One telling item in today's news is that Republicans are looking into some of the scientists in the emails. What is telling is that the note in the news says "Republicans." It doesn't say "Congressmen," "the editorial boards of xxx Journal," "Scientists," "University of YYYY" people, it says Republicans. I find this ironic because I see the big payday, Cap and Trade, as a way of forcing massive amounts of money to change hands without having any effect on greenhouse gas emissions, because the caps will necessarily be what can be tolerated by the world infrastructure, and that cap is essentially already in-place for everyone that will honor it. With the "conventional wisdom" that this means that big international business will be the beneficiaries of Cap-and-Trade, why aren't the Democrats going after this? And, if the emails are indeed a red herring as people like Begley say, why aren't the global warming people going after the emails to get to the bottom of it so that the red herring will go away?

I do believe that those of the scientific community that have a stake in anything connected with the emails are indeed looking into how to clear up any issues that may be raised, or that may come up in further investigations. That community is simply not under the same scrutiny by the press as Congress, and generally operates quietly until something conclusive needs to be announced. In the end, as Begley says, the scientific community quite likely will "sort itself out" but the outcome may or may not be what Begley presupposes.

May the best car win. What's the emissions on a CTS-V, anyway? Not the window sticker, the measured tailpipe emissions?

CTS-V_LateralGs_6-2018_tiny.jpg
-- Click Here for CaddyInfo page on "How To" Read Your OBD Codes
-- Click Here for my personal page to download my OBD code list as an Excel file, plus other Cadillac data
-- See my CaddyInfo car blogs: 2011 CTS-V, 1997 ETC
Yes, I was Jims_97_ETC before I changed cars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...