Sat 10 Oct 2009
Summary: Again, IPCC- providers postulate anthropogenic global warming after a period of 11 years of cooling, which were, of course, global warming, nevertheless! The manmade CO2 myth goes back to Edmund de Rothschild (1987) - 28.53 min but was incarnated by Keith Briffa´s (1995) "detection" of a positive correlation between summer temperature and the width of treerings in Yamal, Siberia. The material had been provided by 2 Russians - on their mere words, although it might just as easily have been from St. Petersburg! Briffa got a professorship with this material, when with just 3 drill cores he claimed historical and scientific evidence of the medieval warm period to be nonsense! Since he corroborated with cores from 12 trees! In return, temperature was stated not to have been higher over the last 2000 years than about the year 2000! Michael Mann built a hockey stick curve on Briffas "finds"- the symbol of aggressive global warming. They would not surrender their material for contol testing through 10 years - until the Royal Society at the request of Steve McIntyre forced them to do so. Then the whole web of lies fell to the ground: Briffas own material showed that there is no positive correlation between the Siberian summer temperature and the widths of treerings. Furthermore, Briffa had selected the 12 trees that showed rising temperature / treering correlation, omitting a material from many more neighboring trees. After they were plotted in, there was no correlation whatsoever! The treering method itself is unsuitable as an indicator because of the local influence of moisture, nutrients, etc. Briffa and Mann led the IPCC, who never intervened. These 2 men are the instigators of the crazy political and corporate climate ideology that real climatologists cannot see a basis for. It's all a huge lie - built on anti-science. But it does not stop the IPCC or the New World Order politicians. Neither Mann! For they are living entirely on lies. Mann now has just made himself the laughing stock of hurricane experts with an amateur hurricane-hockey stick!
We have heard about cold records this summer in the US – even in Al Gore´s Tennessee – the 34 coolest summer on record, as well as about unusual spring snowfall with meter-high drifts in New Zealand (TVNZ 25 Sept. 2009).
But now preliminary analysis by the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), whose T. Karl is a lead author of the fraudulent IPCC, shows global warming! Matt Ferguson writes on abc13 on 24 Sept. 2009: “According to NCDC the combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the June-August season was 61.2 degrees F, which is the third warmest on record and 1.06 degrees F above the 20th century average of 60.1 degrees F. Separately, the global land surface temperature of 58.2 degrees F was 1.33 degrees F above the 20th century average of 56.9 degrees F, and ranked as the fourth warmest August on record. There is no question that humans are impacting planet Earth’s weather.”
Comment: This is a typical and totally unfounded climate-alarmist assertion. As this video shows, there is no correlation between CO2 and global temperature. In the ice age 450 mio years ago atmospheric CO2 was 10 times higher than now.
All right, here is what junkscience has to say about the NCDC: There has been some discussion whether we should plot both GISTEMP and NCDC given the highly incestuous nature of the data. A number of users have requested we omit NCDC and RSS since they essentially only clutter the plot without adding any useful information. We have agreed to do so!
GISS Temp and James Hansen have been caught redhanded twice, cheating with global temperature, the latest time carrying over and repeating scores of figures from the previous month two months running – not being based on October measurements, then calling that month with many cold records all over the world the warmest on record. This blog has often shown the mendacipus nature of the IPCC and the CO2 fraud.
University of Alabama in Huntsville is one of the 4 institutes that measure global temperature (satellite). Here global temperatures 1979 - 2008. The 1998 spike is due to the el nino phenomenon - not global warming.
So what is this global warming nonsense based upon?
The Register, 29 Sept. 2009: A scientific scandal is casting a shadow over a number of recent peer-reviewed climate papers. At least eight papers purporting to reconstruct the historical temperature record times may need to be revisited, with significant implications for contemporary climate studies, the basis of the IPCC's assessments. A number of these involve senior climatologists at the British climate research centre CRU at the University East Anglia. In every case, peer review failed to pick up the errors.
At issue is the use of tree rings as a temperature proxy, or dendrochronology. Using statistical techniques, researchers take the ring data to create a "reconstruction" of historical temperature anomalies. But trees are a highly controversial indicator of temperature, since the rings principally record Co2, and also record humidity, rainfall, nutrient intake and other local factors. Picking a temperature signal out of all this noise is problematic, and a dendrochronology can differ significantly from instrumented data. In dendro jargon, this disparity is called "divergence". The process of creating a raw data set also involves a selective use of samples - a choice open to a scientist's biases.
Yet none of this has stopped paleoclimatologists from making bold claims using tree ring data.
In particular, since 2000, a large number of peer-reviewed climate papers have incorporated data from trees at the Yamal Peninsula in Siberia. This dataset gained favour, curiously superseding a newer and larger data set from nearby. The older Yamal trees indicated pronounced and dramatic uptick in temperatures. Climate scientists Withholding the raw data, other scientists could not reproduce the results. The most prestigious peer reviewed journals, including Nature and Science, were reluctant to demand the data from contributors.
At the insistence of editors of the Royal Society's Philosophical Transactions B the data has leaked into the open - and Yamal's mystery is no more. From this we know that the Yamal data set uses just 12 trees from a larger set to produce its dramatic recent trend. Yet many more were cored, and a larger data set (of 34) from the vicinity shows no dramatic recent warming, and warmer temperatures in the middle ages. In all there are 252 cores in the CRU Yamal data set, of which ten were alive 1990. All 12 cores selected show strong growth since the mid-19th century. The implication is clear: the dozen were cherry-picked.
Keith Briffa: Lying for the New World Order is rewarding.
Controversy has been raging since 1995, when an explosive paper by Keith Briffa at the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia asserted that the medieval warm period was actually really cold, and recent warming is unusually warm. Both archaeology and the historical accounts, Briffa was declaring, were bunk. Briffa relied on just three cores from Siberia to demonstrate this. Three years later Nature published a paper by (Michael) Mann, Bradley and Hughes based on temperature reconstructions which showed something similar: warmer now, cooler then. With Briffa and Mann as chapter editors of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), this distinctive pattern became emblematic - the "Logo of Global Warming" (Hockey stick). Mann too used dendrochronology to chill temperatures, and rebuffed attempts to publish his measurement data. Initially he said he had forgotten where he put it, then declined to disclosed it. (Some of Mann's data was eventually discovered, by accident, on his ftp server in a directory entitled 'BACKTO_1400-CENSORED'.)
Tree data was secondary in importance to Mann's statistical technique, which would produce a dramatic modern upturn in temperatures - which became nicknamed the "Hockey Stick" - even using red noise. Similarly, all the papers that used the Yamal data have the same point to make. All suggest recent dramatic warming. Having scored a global hit with a combination of flawed statistics and dubious dendroclimatology, the acts repeated the formula.
"Late 20th century warmth is unprecedented for at least roughly the past two millennia for the Northern Hemisphere," wrote the two authors of “Global Surface Temperatures over the Past Two Millennia” published in Geophysical Research Letters in 2003 - Mann, and Phil Jones of CRU. It continues to this day.
Figure 6 and 2 showing treering-samples from Siberia - Yamal, would be in West Siberia. From Briffa et al 1998. Regional tree growth and temperatures. Right: Decadally smoothed tree growth (thin lines), maximum-latewood density or ring width, plotted against mean summer temperatures (thick lines), April–September for density and June–August for ring width.
The left half shows density (MXD), the right half ring width (RW). The figure of particular interest to us is WSIB ring width (third row, right half). The thick line in the left panel shows temperature, the thin line ring width (both smoothed), showing that ring widths in this region, as elsewhere in the world, had not kept pace with temperature. The right panel shows the difference (the "divergence problem"). The "divergence problem" affects both ring width and density.
As lead author, Briffa was a key contributor in shaping the assessment of the IPCC. A small group was able to rewrite history.
When the IPCC was alerted to peer-reviewed research that refuted the idea, it declined to include it. This leads to the more general, and more serious issue: what happens when peer-review fails - as it did here? The scandal has only come to light because of the dogged persistence of a Canadian mathematician who attempted to reproduce the results. Steve McIntyre has written dozens of letters requesting the data and methodology, and over 7,000 blog posts. Yet Yamal has remained elusive for almost a decade.
Briffa has posted an answer, wherein he tells that he has his data from 2 Russians, that he has not yet had time to study McIntyre´s material, and that he has unpublished material to corroborate his claims – and that his team is working on corroborating it!
McIntyre´s answer 7 Oct. 2009: “If ring widths have gone down in the last half of the 20th century (Briffas graphs) despite increasing temperatures, how can we use information from prior periods to reconstruct past temperatures? Kurt Cuffey was much puzzled by this conundrum at the NAS panel hearings.
I got an email this morning in which Hantemirov told a correspondent that they used 120 cores in a forthcoming study and only used long cores for corridor standardization because that's what you need for this method. This confirms my prior point that the requirements of the corridor method were different than the RCS method and that a much larger population of cores was available, though, for some reason, not used in Briffa et al 2008.”
Briffa received his material - just wth the word of 2 Russians, that it really was from Jamal!!! My ophthalmological articles would never have been accepted in such a case! Why on Earth did Briffa not wait to publish until he had corroborated his figures and corrected his blatantly false use of biassed, selective dendrochronology – setting the whole world awry by his unfounded and contradictory “findings”? And why did the IPCC accept such junk science – Briffa maintaining a positive correlation between global warming and thicker ring widths, which his own graphs show to be non-existing? Because there was money and political demand in going ahead with a huge lie, which is the very reason for the existence of the IPCC? That would be the explanation for their unwillingnes to hand over their raw material – until demanded by the Royal Society (see below). And why does Briffa just deliver the findings of 2 Russians to the IPCC – instead of letting them present their own findings, so that he would not have to make the Russians his scapegoats now for this deception with very wide-ranging consequences for all of us? Well, of course, Briffa got a professorship for that lie – as others have made political careers and others again are making big money on it.
The Telegraph 29 Sept. 2009: “Those of you who saw “An Inconvenient Truth” may remember the key scene where big green Al deploys his terrifying graph to show how totally screwed we all are by man-made global warming. This graph – known as the Hockey Stick Curve – purports to show rising global temperatures through the ages. In the part representing the late twentieth century it shoots up almost vertically.
The graph – devised in 1998 by a US climatologist called Dr Michael Mann - is based on a huge lie, as sceptics have been saying for quite some time.
According to Mann’s graph, the hottest period in modern history was NOT the generally balmy era between 900 and 1300 but the late 20th century. This led many sceptics, among them a Canadian mathematician named Steve McIntyre to smell a rat. He tried to replicate Mann’s tree ring work but was stymied by lack of data: ie. the global community of climate-fear-promotion scientists closed ranks and refused to provide him with any information that might contradict their cause.
The Hadley Centre in Exeter and the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at University of East Anglia are among the primary drivers of global climate change alarmism. Their data has formed the basis for the IPCC’s “we’re all doomed” reports; their scientists – among them Professor Phil Jones and tree ring expert Professor Keith Briffa – have been doughty supporters of Mann’s Hockey Stick theory and of the computer models showing inexorably rising temperatures. When McIntyre approached the Met Office and the CRU for more information they refused, claiming implausibly that it would damage Britain’s “international relations” with all the countries that supplied it. Later they went a step further and claimed the data had been mislaid.
The infamous Hockey Stick used to prove “global warming”. The red line is Michael Mann´s, Biffra´s, Al Gore´s the IPCC´s etc scaremongering – the black line, the correction, represents scientific reality.
“Years go by. McIntyre is still stymied trying to get access to the original source data so that he can replicate the Mann 1998 conclusion. In 2008 Mann and Professor Keith Briffa of the Hadley UK Climate Research Unit used one of the tree ring data series (Yamal in Russia) in a paper published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in 2008, which has a strict data archiving policy. Thanks to that policy, Steve McIntyre fought and won access to that data just last week.”
When finally McIntyre plotted in a much larger and more representative range of samples than used those used by Briffa – though from exactly the same area – the results he got were startlingly different (see above).
Now Michael Mann has done it again: He has announced a hurricane hockey stick – being ridiculed by hurricane experts: “The paper comes to very erroneous conclusions because of using improper data and illogical techniques,” said Chris Landsea, science and operations officer at the National Hurricane Center.”
Scandal, error, that doesn´t matter to the IPCC and its New World Order masters. Tgey are all built on lies. They are steamrollering any scientific objections on their way to their world governance meeting in Copenhagen in Dec. this year.
The biggest and most grotesque lie in the history of mankind ist the climate fraud. However, it does in a nutshell show the intentions of the New World Order.
First, here is a very revealing situation– video: The Bilderberger and Illuministen (explanatory statement) world governance champion, EU Commission President José Barroso, speaking at the illuminist, world government champion, the Council on Foreign Relations: “I am very, very worried about Copenhagen (Climate Conference in Dec.). If it fails it will be the longest suicide in history!!! The Capital market plays a very important role in securing clean energy. Climate policy is i.a. foreign policy!!” Oddly, Mr. Barroso appears as nervous as a pupil in for an examination by his masters.
As shown on this blog time and again, there just an immoral greedy New World order corporative and political strategy wanting to loot and to enslave us.
EU-Commission affiliated Blogactiv: Humanity Needs A Universal Carbon Tax. It should be introduced at low rates to start with, say no more than € 10 per ton of C02, corresponding to about five cent per litre gasoline, but rise automatically, say every two years, to attain at least € 40 in 2030 and later to € 60 - 100. In fact, the EU is planning a CO2–tax to impose upon us – beside the ETS/ECX – profit machine for Rothschild, Rockefeller and Al Gore. All just as the bilderbergers decided in 2005 – witnessed by Daniel Estulin.
Demonstraters before the European Climate Exchange (website) in London on 27 Aug. 2009. This ECX has 2 sisters: The Chicago Climate Exchange and the Chicago Climate Futures Exchange. They are impatiently waiting for the US climate plan and its gigantic transactions at the cost of the Americans!
No one saw the consequences of the climate lie more clearly than Czech President Václav Klaus,
economist – and the only decent statesman today: "The ideology will be different. Its essence will, nevertheless, be identical–the attractive, pathetic, at first sight noble idea that transcends the individual in the name of the common good, and the enormous self-confidence on the side of its proponents about their right to sacrifice man and his freedom in order to make this idea reality."
What I had in mind was, of course, environmentalism and its currently strongest version, climate alarmism…. "What is endangered: climate or freedom?" My answer is clear and resolute: "It is our freedom." I may also add "and our prosperity."….The climate alarmists believe in their own omnipotence,…to give adequate instructions to hundreds of millions of individuals and institutions. It is not about climatology. It is about freedom.”
9 Responses to “ Global Warming I. Just Revealed As a Gigantic Scientific Deception ”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.