|
Post by magellan on Jan 28, 2009 2:18:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by ebrainsh on Jan 28, 2009 2:27:23 GMT
This is the type of reporting at Science Daily I am fighting: 2008 Global Temperature Ties As Eighth Warmest On Record ScienceDaily (Jan. 19, 2009) — The year 2008 tied with 2001 as the eighth warmest year on record for the Earth, based on the combined average of worldwide land and ocean surface temperatures through December, according to a preliminary analysis by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. For December alone, the month also ranked as the eighth warmest globally, for the combined land and ocean surface temperature. The assessment is based on records dating back to 1880. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090116163206.htm
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Jan 28, 2009 2:32:07 GMT
This is the type of reporting at Science Daily I am fighting: 2008 Global Temperature Ties As Eighth Warmest On Record ScienceDaily (Jan. 19, 2009) — The year 2008 tied with 2001 as the eighth warmest year on record for the Earth, based on the combined average of worldwide land and ocean surface temperatures through December, according to a preliminary analysis by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. For December alone, the month also ranked as the eighth warmest globally, for the combined land and ocean surface temperature. The assessment is based on records dating back to 1880. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090116163206.htmMaybe they forgot about this? www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/jgr07/M&M.JGRDec07.pdfOr maybe this? climate.jpl.nasa.gov/files/LAHeatWaves-JournalArticle.pdfAnother on problems with the surface data? Hmmm. www.climatesci.org/publications/pdf/R-321.pdfThere are a LOT more where those came from. You are in a losing battle. It should be obvious by now they are an archive for propaganda and appeal to Authority. Why didn't they report the 2008 satellite data compared to the last 30 years?
|
|
|
Post by ebrainsh on Jan 28, 2009 2:45:06 GMT
sent to ScienceDaily: Quantifying the influence of anthropogenic surface processes and inhomogeneities on gridded global climate data Ross R. McKitrick1 and Patrick J. Michaels2 Received 26 January 2007; revised 3 May 2007; accepted 8 November 2007; published 14 December 2007. www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/jgr07/M&M.JGRDec07.pdf
|
|
|
Post by ebrainsh on Jan 28, 2009 3:05:18 GMT
Sent to ScienceDaily: Unresolved issues with the assessment of multidecadal global land surface temperature trends Roger A. Pielke Sr.,1 Christopher A. Davey,2 Dev Niyogi,3,4 Souleymane Fall,4 Jesse Steinweg-Woods,3,4 Ken Hubbard,5 Xiaomao Lin,5 Ming Cai,6 Young-Kwon Lim,7 Hong Li,8 John Nielsen-Gammon,9 Kevin Gallo,10 Robert Hale,11 Rezaul Mahmood,12 Stuart Foster,12 Richard T. McNider,13 and Peter Blanken14 Received 7 November 2006; revised 5 February 2007; accepted 14 May 2007; published 29 December 2007. www.climatesci.org/publications/pdf/R-321.pdfJOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 112, D24S08, doi:10.1029/2006JD008229, 2007
|
|
|
Post by ebrainsh on Jan 28, 2009 3:13:16 GMT
This just published in ScienceDaily: Climate Change Largely Irreversible For Next 1,000 Years, NOAA Reports ScienceDaily (Jan. 28, 2009) — A new scientific study led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reaches a powerful conclusion about the climate change caused by future increases of carbon dioxide: to a large extent, there’s no going back. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090127163403.htm
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Jan 28, 2009 6:13:29 GMT
This just published in ScienceDaily: Climate Change Largely Irreversible For Next 1,000 Years, NOAA Reports ScienceDaily (Jan. 28, 2009) — A new scientific study led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reaches a powerful conclusion about the climate change caused by future increases of carbon dioxide: to a large extent, there’s no going back. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090127163403.htmI give up.
|
|
|
Post by Pooh on Jan 28, 2009 8:18:49 GMT
This just published in ScienceDaily: Climate Change Largely Irreversible For Next 1,000 Years, NOAA ReportsScienceDaily (Jan. 28, 2009) — A new scientific study led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reaches a powerful conclusion about the climate change caused by future increases of carbon dioxide: to a large extent, there’s no going back. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090127163403.htm I apologize to ebranish. I thought ebranish to be the publisher of Science Daily. On re-reading the first post, the comment below should have been addressed to Dan Hogan.I suggest your efforts might be helped by critical reading and personal, independent research to verify claims made in "peer reviewed" research. For myself, I am cautious about any paper that a) mentions computer adjustments or in-filling the raw data, b) ignores alternative drivers and c) includes Mann among its authors. I also suggest trying to emulate Climate Debate Daily, climatedebatedaily.com/, which attempts to post AGW pros and cons side by side. This positioning is often frustrated by AGW supporters publishing an avalanche of stories, since the skeptics must take a day or so to review the stories and respond. It does not help that detail and support for agw claims is missing, not accessible, or hidden behind legal or "pay-to-play" barriers.
Here are a few gleanings on another issue ("Antarctic Warming"): Marohasy, Jennifer. “Modellers Remove Evidence of Cooling and Editor Removes Comment by Climate Sceptic.” jennifermarohasy.com. jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2009/01/modellers-remove-evidence-of-cooling-and-editor-removes-comment-by-climate-sceptic/. McIntyre, Steve. “Antarctic RegEM.” Blog. Climate Audit, January 21, 2009. www.climateaudit.org/?p=4914. ---. “Steig's Silence.” Climate Audit , January 24, 2009. www.climateaudit.org/?p=4945. Morano, Marc. “Scientists, Data Challenge New Antarctic ‘Warming’ Study .” Government. U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page, January 21, 2009. epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=fc7db6ad-802a-23ad-43d1-2651eb2297d6&IsPrint=True. Pielke Sr., Roger. “Follow Up On Today’s AP Article By Seth Bornenstein Entitled “Study: Antarctica Joins Rest Of Globe In Warming”.” Blog. Climate Science: Roger Pielke Sr. Research Group News, January 21, 2009. climatesci.org/2009/01/21/follow-up-on-todays-ap-article-by-seth-bornenstein-entitled-study-antarctica-joins-rest-of-globe-in-warming/. “Satellites Confirm Half-Century of West Antarctic Warming.” Scientific. NASA GISS: Research News: , January 21, 2009. www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20090121/. Steig, Eric J., and Michael E. Mann. “State of Antarctica: red or blue?.” RealClimate. www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/01/state-of-antarctica-red-or-blue/. Steig, Eric J., David P. Schneider, Scott D. Rutherford, Michael E. Mann, Josefino C. Comiso, and Drew T. Shindell. “ Warming of the Antarctic ice-sheet surface since the 1957 International Geophysical Year.” Nature 457, no. 7228 (January 22, 2008): 459-462. doi:10.1038/nature07669. dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature07669. ---. “ Warming of the Antarctic ice-sheet surface since the 1957 International Geophysical Year (Complete).” Nature 457 (January 22, 2009): 459 - 462. doi:10.1038. thingsbreak.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/steigetalnature09.pdf. Watts, Anthony. “ Antarctica Warming? An Evolution of Viewpoint.” Blog Summaries. ICECAP, January 22, 2009. icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/antarctica_warming_an_evolution_of_viewpoint1/.
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Jan 28, 2009 11:38:34 GMT
OK, can we please stop this crap now? First ebrainsh post is sigged as Dan Hogan, Editor & Publisher ScienceDaily -- Your source for the latest research news 1 Research Court, Suite 450 Rockville, Maryland 20850 Web: www.sciencedaily.comEmail: editor@sciencedaily.com Phone/Fax: (240) 454-9600 Then we get a whole heap of BS about sending stuff to Dan Hogan or to Science Daily & how hard this poor bast-ard is having it trying to get SD to be impartial. ebrainsh is EDITOR & PUBLISHER - according to him anyway - now I am probably not the brightest chip on the block but I would think the EDITOR & PUBLISHER first, doesn't need to send himself articles!!! and second, makes the rules for his own publication!!!Now can we stop pandering to this guy? A real journalist has more than enough from what's already here to go write a world beating story. And also enough to talk about the gullibility of the sceptic community in believing he actually has a desire to report truth even when he laid it out up front how full of sh-it he is. magellan, you called him for it right up front in 2nd post. At BEST this was spam - at worst, entrapment. well done mate...
|
|
|
Post by ron on Jan 28, 2009 12:45:27 GMT
OK, can we please stop this crap now? First ebrainsh post is sigged as Dan Hogan, Editor & Publisher ScienceDaily -- Your source for the latest research news 1 Research Court, Suite 450 Rockville, Maryland 20850 Web: www.sciencedaily.comEmail: editor@sciencedaily.com Phone/Fax: (240) 454-9600 Then we get a whole heap of BS about sending stuff to Dan Hogan or to Science Daily & how hard this poor bast-ard is having it trying to get SD to be impartial. ebrainsh is EDITOR & PUBLISHER - according to him anyway - now I am probably not the brightest chip on the block but I would think the EDITOR & PUBLISHER first, doesn't need to send himself articles!!! and second, makes the rules for his own publication!!!Now can we stop pandering to this guy? A real journalist has more than enough from what's already here to go write a world beating story. And also enough to talk about the gullibility of the sceptic community in believing he actually has a desire to report truth even when he laid it out up front how full of sh-it he is. magellan, you called him for it right up front in 2nd post. At BEST this was spam - at worst, entrapment. well done mate... I would guess he was posting a letter he got from someone else and didn't put it inside of quote tags, Brainiac.
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Jan 28, 2009 13:00:37 GMT
I would guess he was posting a letter he got from someone else and didn't put it inside of quote tags, Brainiac. The poor of spirit, the ignorant, the small minded & those without resources will choose to go out of their way to be rude without purpose. Guessing is a mugs game - assuming has the common result & I am not related to horses.
|
|
|
Post by tobyglyn on Jan 28, 2009 13:09:13 GMT
I would guess he was posting a letter he got from someone else and didn't put it inside of quote tags, Brainiac. The poor of spirit, the ignorant, the small minded & those without resources will choose to go out of their way to be rude without purpose. Guessing is a mugs game - assuming has the common result & I am not related to horses. Seems pretty obvious to me that ron's guess is correct.
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Jan 28, 2009 13:53:07 GMT
It's a sad state of affairs when so-called "science" journals allow garbage such as that 'Thousand years of catastrophe' see the light of day. What most don't realize is any member of PNAS can get their essays published no matter how silly it is. All they need is another member to sign on and viola!, instant scientific study on the books for AGW.
Are science journals now tabloid horoscope rags? Apparently so.
I gave ebrainsh the benefit of the doubt after his explanation, but once he posted this latest 'READ ALL ABOUT IT' trash the spam assumption holds more water IMO, and possibly elevates to troll status. He can search and read just as easily as anyone.
My suspicion is there are sock puppets lurking the forum, but it would be too much to ask the moderators to track IP addresses.
Ebrainsh, Science Daily is a propaganda outlet for AGW to be sure. That PNAS policy permits unfalsifiable hypotheses to be published speaks volumes, and for SD to label it a scientific study does too.
Anyone can do a search for Susan Solomon and understand her agenda.
|
|
|
Post by ebrainsh on Jan 28, 2009 16:51:05 GMT
Acolyte, I ASSURE YOU AM NOT THAT STUPID. I am Not Dan Hogan and I am trying to get him to publish more research about the whole spectrum of global climate issues. Its tough but I will continue to bombard him with research you and your buddies provide me with.
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Jan 28, 2009 17:33:06 GMT
Acolyte, I ASSURE YOU AM NOT THAT STUPID. I am Not Dan Hogan and I am trying to get him to publish more research about the whole spectrum of global climate issues. Its tough but I will continue to bombard him with research you and your buddies provide me with. I trust you understand the significance of the pic I posted?
|
|