Showing posts with label man made. Show all posts
Showing posts with label man made. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Winter, Global Warming Pictures: Man-Made Climate Change Comes Early



Your Ad Here


Pixelaneous #59
Climate Change Comes Early
To Ohio-Pennsylvania-West Virginia






Mid-November and the livin' is easy.

Man-made climate change showed up a bit early last week. We were there to document it.




MORE Pixelaneous at DBKP: Pixelaneous Photo Essays Library.

* 58: November 18, 2008
--Heart Attack Grill: Lard, Luckies, Naughty Nurses and Politically Incorrect Food
* 57: September 19, 2008
--Air Show Pictures: Surprising Pictures
* 55 & 56: September 8, 16, 2008
--Car and Bike Show: Labor Day 2008 in Wheeling, WV Pictures
--More Labor Day Car and Bike Show Pictures
* 54: August 29, 2008
Cool Cat Photos: Pixelaneous 54
* 53: August 23, 2008
Denver, Dem Nat'l. Convention: Photos Two Days Before the Convention
* 52: August 12, 2008
Beijing Olympics: China’s Language Barrier
* 51: August 8, 2008
John Edwards Scandal: The Many Faces of Contrition
* 50: July 22, 2008
Candy Cigarettes: The Most Politically-Incorrect Candy










ALSO at DBKP:
James Hansen: Cooking the NASA Books for Climate Change




More Pixelaneous!
Library of DBKP Pixelaneous Photo Essays




by Mondo Frazier
images: dbkp




Friday, November 14, 2008

James Hansen: Cooking the NASA Books for Climate Change



Your Ad Here


NASA's James Hansen:
Pimping Climate Change on the Public Dime








Meet James Hansen


In America, and perhaps the world, the pre-eminent source for global weather information is NASA. Blessed with three or more temperature measuring satellites, NASA also collects data from NOAA and foreign sources to get a fix on global temperatures. This convergence of resources is unparalleled , and thus much of the world uses NASA's continually-revised data and graphs to determine weather history and policy.

Which is unfortunate.

Particularly, because NASA simply cannot be trusted to provide scientifically unbiased information on this subject. When not demonstrating incomprehensible incompetence, NASA cooks the books.

Chef-in-chief is Dr. James Hansen.




James Hansen's name should sound familiar. He is the fellow who has been screaming about global warming for over 20 years. He famously claimed that the Bush Administration was trying to silence him (huh?).

He is the detached scientists that went to Congress and testified that oil executives should be tried for crimes against humanity. (Wonder what penal statute that is?)

In real life, as opposed to the imaginary one occupied by the marvelous Dr James Hansen, the man is like an incompetent, unthinking, dogmatic, dolt: systematically reducing NASA to a high school-level science fair.

The latest, as reported by the Daily Tech:

Amateur team finds NASA error similar to one they discovered a year ago.

GISS’ most recent data release originally reported last October as being extraordinarily warm-- a full 0.78C above normal. This would have made it the warmest October on record; a huge increase over the previous month's data.

Those results set off alarm bells with Steve McIntyre and his gang of Baker Street irregulars at Climateaudit.org. They noted that NASA's data didn't agree at all with the satellite temperature record, which showed October to be very mild, continuing the same trend of slight cooling that has persisted since 1998. So they dug a little deeper.

McIntyre, the same man who found errors last year in GISS's US temperature record, quickly noted that most of the temperature increase was coming from Russia. A chart of world temperatures showed that in October, most of Russia, the largest nation on Earth, was not only registering hot, but literally off the scale. Yet anecdotal reports were suggesting that worldwide, October was actually slightly colder than normal. Could there be another error in GISS's data?

An alert reader on McIntyre's blog revealed that there was a very large problem. Looking at the actual readings from individual stations in Russia showed a curious anomaly. The locations had all been assigned the exact temperatures from a month earlier-- the much warmer month of September. Russia cools very rapidly in the fall months, so recycling the data from the earlier month had led to a massive temperature increase."





[ABOVE: Russian October 2008]




I know what you are thinking. Anybody could have made the same mistake: using September data for October. And you might be right. Because the Wonder Boys and Girls at NASA do it all the time.

The really odd thing is: it is a one-way street.

Because such errors, inexplicably, always show the Earth warming.

Even if it isn't.

The correction forced upon NASA last year was even more dramatic because it altered the entire Global Warming premise (although I am sure you have not heard a word about this in the media).

Going over the NASA historical weather graph, Steve McKintyre noticed some severe and unlikely high temperature spikes. He asked NASA for its mathematical model in an attempt to understand the same. A model is necessary because weather averages and means are based upon widely divergent observations, with sparse reporting on the high seas (thus satellites), Antarctica, and Africa.

NASA refused (of course).


McKintyre reverse engineered the model and discovered NASA had fallen victim to a Y2K bug. The result:

"NASA has now silently released corrected figures, and the changes are truly astounding.

The warmest year on record is now 1934.

1998 (long trumpeted by the media as record-breaking) moves to second place. 1921 takes third. In fact, 5 of the 10 warmest years on record now all occur before World War II.





Revision of data at NASA is all too common.

It works like this: if the data does not support global warming, it is wrong. So it must be revised. From the Wall Street Journal:

For years, records from surface thermometers showed a global warming trend beginning in the late 1970s. But temperatures sensed by satellites and weather balloons displayed no concurrent warming. These records have been revised a number of times, and I examined the two major revisions of these three records.....There have been six major revisions in the warming figures in recent years, all in the same direction.


That direction would be to make the past colder thus making the current temperature appear warmer. Why have surface temperatures warmed? As Dr Alan Watts has long since proved, because of urbanization and the deterioration of locations of the thermometers. They are located in heat wells, near AC vents or at airports.Ridiculous. The background radiation should be measured in a grassy field of an acre or so, with instrumentation in a vented shad shed at least 4 feet off the ground.

Try to find that anymore.

As for NASA, you would think they would be pleased to have bloggers and casual observers correct their incompetence. Actually, we are kidding you there. Again from the Wall Street Journal:

So far this year NASA has issued at least five press releases that could be described as alarming on the pace of climate change. But the correction of its overestimate of global warming was merely posted on the agency's Web site. James Hansen, NASA's ubiquitous climate scientist and a man who has charged that the Bush Administration is censoring him on global warming, has been unapologetic about NASA's screw up. He claims that global warming skeptics -- "court jesters," he calls them -- are exploiting this incident to "confuse the public about the status of knowledge of global climate change, thus delaying effective action to mitigate climate change.


So having been proved wrong, James Hansen, Weather Clown, insists that what was just disproved is still correct.

Wonderful science there.

Hansen recently made headlines when he travelled to London to testify on behalf of a group of environmentalists who had damaged a coal plant in protest against global warming. Hansen also serves as science advisor to Al Gore.


Hansen is a crank. And he should be fired He is a media whore whose boundless ignorance and prejudice have endangered the economic future of this nation and has destroyed the reputation of NASA.



[ABOVE: Hansen Measuring precipitation?]




by pat
images:
dequalss
vladnews
dvdinmypants
sources:
http://www.dailytech.com/Deja+Vu+All+Over+Again+Blogger+Again+Finds+Error+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article13410.htm
http://wattsupwiththat.com/
http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/correct_the_corrections_the_giss_urban_adjustment/
http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+Finds+Y2K+Bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118835472067611877.html?mod=most_emailed_day




Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Martin Eisenstadt-Palin Hoax: No Harm, No Foul



Your Ad Here


True Confessions:
Martin Eisenstadt Story a HOAX
The Hoax of Manmade Climate Change Still Not Reported









Sarah Palin Africa Story Leaker is a Hoax
--But, HOAX Quickly Discovered


Yesterday's story from an obscure blog, Martin Eisenstadt's Blog, claimed the author the source of the "Sarah Palin doesn't know Africa is a continent" news leak.

"Eisenstadt the source for Sarah Palin Africa leak...and Proud of it"

By now you’ve all heard the Fox News report last week that “unnamed” former McCain advisers
leaked that Sarah Palin was confused about whether Africa was a continent, and which countries were in NAFTA. I was perfectly happy staying under the radar as an anonymous source for Fox NewsCarl Cameron, but now that Palin has accused her accusers of being “unprofessional…jerks…cowards… taking things out of context, and then tried to spread something on national news” and begun to cast doubt on the Fox News report, maybe she’s right to a certain extent. For those of us on the McCain campaign who thought that she acted like a rogue diva and lost John the election, maybe we DO have a responsibility to come out in public. But Sarah… careful what you ask for: some of us may have more to reveal.

So yes, to be clear, last week I was the one who leaked those things to a producer at Fox News who works with Cameron. Carl and his producers are good guys, and I don’t want them to have to worry about protecting their sources (and going through the wringer ala Judith Miller or Matt Cooper) on something like this.




The story turns out to be as believable as the original leaks were.

That is, they were a hoax.

Some reported on the Eisenstadt revelation; some didn't.

The hoax was caught fairly quickly and alerts issued. MSNBC broadcast the hoax as fact before they caught it. Anyone who watched MSNBC's election coverage couldn't tell any difference in the network's accuracy--either before or after the hoax broadcast.

But we say, whether you wrote or broadcast it or not: it was discovered quickly, so no harm, no foul.





Allah Pundit summed it up pretty well, Video: MSNBC falls for Palin/Eisenstadt hoax

Specifically, this hoax. I’d love to throw stones at them and TNR, but people on our own side were taken in too.

Guys? The post at Shakespeare’s Sister revealing the hoax is linked on the first page of the Google results for “Martin Eisenstadt.” Remember these goofball viral “ads” for Giuliani? Anything look familiar?

The “Harding Institute for Freedom and Democracy”? Named after one of America’s worst presidents, whose term in office lasted two years with zero foreign policy accomplishments?


We'd agree with all of that and add one observation. At least TNR didn't take months to report that they'd been had--unlike the Beauchamp diaries fiasco.

Some of the places commenting on the whole affair--both pre- and post-hoax--are listed below.





One Hoax Remains Unreported by the MSM




At least the Eisenstadt story was exposed early on. Most of the places who reported on it were good sports, such as ACE: HOAX: Martin Eisenstadt Admits He's One of Palin-Smear Leakers; Threatens to "Reveal" More

Now that I put a face to the made-up persona, I can see it seems a bit unlikely that a 28 year old NYC hipster-wannabe is a major McCain foreign policy adviser.

Well, he got me.

TNR Retracts... But refuses to credit Allah for alerting them to the hoax.

Note: A dinky site would notice the Hot Air traffic. Not only is Michael Crowley a dupe (as I was), but now he's a dishonest one, pretending that he discovered the hoax on his own.



The only thing we'd disagree with Ace about is the "dupe" label.

Once upon a time, the media reported news. If the news turned out to be false, they reported that also. Then, the name of the media game became, "We're going to hold stories until every last detail can be confirmed".

Fine.

But that policy then morphed into, "We're going to hold stories that we don't think readers have the finely-tuned understanding and reasoning skills about which to make a judgment".

Finally, that policy became--at many MSM outlets--"We're going to hold stories that we don't agree with or that we think are detrimental to our editorial policy".

That policy was responsible for ABC's refusal to air one minute of coverage on the John Edwards scandal--until Edwards turned up on ABC's Nightline on August 8 and started talking about mistresses and babies and hush money and getting caught in the Beverly Hilton.

Imagine ABC viewers' surprise when they learned that the story had been on-going for ten months and they were kept in the dark.

The New York Times, MSNBC, Washington Post, CBS, and the LA Times, among others, duped their readers/viewers for months during the primary and general elections on any number of unreported topics concerning Barack Obama.

They are duping them still on the issue of climate change, though that will be harder to pull off--especially when their news customers are digging out from underneath three feet of global warming.

So, the Eisenstadt 'confession' about the Sarah Palin leaks was a hoax.

Big deal.

It was quickly exposed in the blogosphere. Meanwhile, the other hoaxes which pass for 'news' in daily Mainstream Media reporting continue.

The Eisenstadt hoax was discovered and reported upon. It's a mistake to think that anyone reporting on the original story somehow had their credibility harmed when they quickly reported that it was a sham story.

The man-made climate change hoax has been discovered, but remains largely unreported in the Mainstream Media.

It's when long-running stories have two sides and readers/viewers only hear one of them from supposed "objective news sources" that credibility--and bottom lines--plunge.

Getting hoaxed? Big deal.

Continuing to report a hoax after there's doubt the story is true?

That's everyday policy at most MSM organizations.



by Mondo Frazier
image: kucheats




 
coompax-digital magazine