Martin W

Even a relatively short road trip from Jakarta allows you to explore glorious landscapes near and south of Pelabuhan Ratu, southern Java.

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 61 through 90 (of 696 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Debora MacKenzie of New Sci vs conservationists #4240
    Martin W
    Participant

      New outbreak(s) of H5N1 on one or two poultry farms in UK, and – would you believe it!? – Deborah Mackenzie quick to suggest wild birds are responsible, despite not having shred of evidence:

      Quote:
      Redgrave Park farm is located very close to a large ornamental lake
      used by wild birds, and is 4 km from a wetlands nature reserve.

      The reserve, England’s largest remaining river fen, is
      internationally protected under the RAMSAR treaty on wetlands and
      home to several endangered species. It also harbors several species
      of dabbling duck, which would have flown into the area from breeding
      grounds in Siberia over the past 2 months.

      Autumn is when the ducks, which can carry H5N1 with no symptoms, are
      most likely to be carrying bird flu. The UK’s 1st outbreak was also
      near a wetland reserve. Domestic ducks can also harbor the virus
      without showing signs.

      – good grief! Deb clearly lives in a bunker, away from scientific reports; referring to UK’s first outbreak and nearby wetland reserve, when reports blamed links in poultry trade to continental Europe, and bad biosecurity.

      Meanwhile, back in the real world, where leaping to conclusions isn’t so typical as at DB’s desk in the poultry and farming publications related New Sci, the Times is reporting:

      Quote:
      Imported day-old ducklings from the Netherlands are now being investigated as a possible route for the H5N1 avian flu virus arriving in Britain.

      The Times has learnt that Gressingham Foods received regular supplies of ducklings delivered by a Dutch exporter.

      Dutch duckling imports are at centre of bird flu inquiry

      in reply to: Global warming lies and climate change hysteria #4487
      Martin W
      Participant

        BBC News website has strong series on global warming scepticism, by environment editor Rickard Black. One article looks at supposed bias within science against sceptics, who like to allege their views are muffled. Includes:

        Quote:
        Of all the accusations made by the vociferous community of climate sceptics, surely the most damaging is that science itself is biased against them. … I invited sceptics to put their cards on the table, and send me documentation or other firm evidence of bias. … Stefan Rahmstorf from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, who is something of an anti-hero to sceptics’ groups as he believes IPCC projections of sea-level rise are far too conservative, had heard this argument before, and he wrote in telling me it was far from convincing. "How likely is it that my funding would suffer if I found a good alternative explanation for the observed global warming, or that I would have trouble publishing it (assuming it would be methodologically sound, of course)?" he asked. "Quite the contrary, I would see it as a path to certain fame! Scientists always strive to find something radically new and different – just reconfirming what is already quite well-known is boring, and certainly will not get you the Nobel Prize. … The sum total of evidence obtained through this open invitation, then, is one first-hand claim of bias in scientific journals, not backed up by documentary evidence; and three second-hand claims, two well-known and one that the scientist in question does not consider evidence of anti-sceptic feeling. No-one said they had been refused a place on the IPCC, the central global body in climate change, or denied a job or turned down for promotion or sacked or refused access to a conference platform, or indeed anything else. If there is an anti-sceptic bias running through the institutions of science, it is evidently keeping itself well hidden. … But I will say this; if someone persistently claims to be a great football player, and yet fails to find the net when you put him in front of an open goal, you cannot do other than doubt his claim.

        Climate science: Sceptical about bias

        in reply to: Future with coal certain but carbon capture an idea #4512
        Martin W
        Participant

          Another strong AP article on coal use – focusing on China’s massive and growing demand for coal. Includes:

          Quote:
          Cheap and abundant, coal has become the fuel of choice in much of the world, powering economic booms in China and India that have lifted millions of people out of poverty. Worldwide demand is projected to rise by about 60 percent through 2030 to 6.9 billion tons a year, most of it going to electrical power plants. But the growth of coal-burning is also contributing to global warming, and is linked to environmental and health issues including acid rain and asthma. Air pollution kills more than 2 million people prematurely, according to the World Health Organization. "Hands down, coal is by far the dirtiest pollutant," said Dan Jaffe, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Washington who has detected pollutants from Asia at monitoring sites on Mount Bachelor in Oregon and Cheeka Peak in Washington state. "It is a pretty bad fuel on all scores." …

          With pressure to clean up major cities such as Shanghai and Beijing, particularly in the run-up to next year’s Beijing Olympics, the central government is turning increasingly to provinces such as Shanxi to meet the country’s power demands. "They look at polluted places like Taiyuan and say it’s so polluted there so it doesn’t matter if they have another five power plants," said Ramanan Laxminarayan, a senior fellow at Resources For the Future, an American think tank that found links between air pollution and rising hospital admissions in Taiyuan. "I visited these power plants and there is no concept of pollution control," he said. "They sort of had a laugh and asked, ‘Why would you expect us to install pollution control equipment?’" China is home to 20 of the world’s 30 most polluted cities, according to a World Bank report. Health costs related to air pollution total $68 billion a year, nearly 4 percent of the country’s economic output, the report said. And acid rain has contaminated a third of the country, Sheng Huaren, a senior Chinese parliamentary official, said last year. It is said to destroy some $4 billion worth of crops every year. "What we are facing in China is enormous economic growth, and … China is paying a price for it," said Henk Bekedam, the country representative for the World Health Organization. "Their growth is not sustainable from an environmental perspective. The good news is that they realize it. The bad news is they’re dependent on coal as an energy source."

          But the costs go far beyond China. The soot from power plants boosts global warming because coal emits almost twice as much carbon dioxide as natural gas. And researchers from Texas A&M University found that air pollution from China and India has increased in cloud cover and major Pacific Ocean storms by 20 percent to 50 percent over the past 20 years. … "Everyone knows coal is dirty, but there is no way that China can get rid of coal," the World Bank’s Zhao Jianping said in Beijing. "It must rely on it for years to come, until humans can find a new magic solution."

          World’s coal dependency hits environment

          World’s growing dependence on coal leaving a trail of environmental devastation across globe

          in reply to: Global warming lies and climate change hysteria #4486
          Martin W
          Participant

            Over on ICECAP – some website I hadn’t heard of that likes to decry global warming – there’s short item by John Coleman that’s attracted attention on right-wing blogs and in the Daily Telegraph.

            Includes:

            Quote:
            It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create an illusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. …

            I am telling you Global Warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis and a total scam. I say this knowing you probably won’t believe a me, a mere TV weatherman …

            I have read dozens of scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct.

            Weather Channel Founder: Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’

            Ah, he’s read "dozens of papers".

            And this the man who has been quoted as saying "Being a TV weatherman in San Diego is an outrageous scam," John Coleman

            Now, the Daily Telegraph ran article on Coleman’s thoughts, w article calling him "Weather Channel boss" – not noticing, it seems, he was turfed out of the Weather Channel some years ago, and the channel now presents info on global warming issue. Ah well, seems Coleman’s effort has proved another straw to clutch at for global warming denialists.

            One more thing that occurred to me, after seeing re Coleman: denialists seem to often be getting on in years; maybe they care little re the future, figuring they won’t see much of it, so doesn’t really matter what they say or write.

            in reply to: Wild South China tiger photographed in Shaanxi #4506
            Martin W
            Participant

              Interesting that, after I’d wondered re the photo I’d seen, there have been reports re questions being raised on internet blogs etc re the authenticity of the South China tiger photos.

              The farmer who took them is headed for Beijing, to get State Forestry people to verify the photos (or not!)

              Just seen that a team will investigate in the area where the photos were reportedly taken. News item includes:

              Quote:
              many suspicious points surfaced in the photo, including the angle of the sunlight and the size of some leaves.

              The Shaanxi Forestry Department said it wants to set up a national nature reserve in the province. The tiger news, whether true or not, has already brought unprecedented attention to the county of 57,000 people in northern Shaanxi.

              Zhou, a former hunter, also arouse more suspicion when he refused to release his photos just one day before the provincial forestry authority planned to hold a news conference about the tiger’s reappearance on October 12.

              Zhou said he wouldn’t allow his pictures to be published unless the provincial authority offered him a reward of one million yuan (US$133,333). He eventually agreed to lower his request to 20,000 yuan for two pictures.

              Team will investigate possible tiger sighting

              in reply to: Global warming lies and climate change hysteria #4485
              Martin W
              Participant

                News piece on Canada.com has some pretty damning looking claims re IPCC, by one Vivian Gray. Includes:

                Quote:
                Dr. Gray’s mission, in his new role as cofounder of The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, is to stop the IPCC from spreading climate-change propaganda that undermines the integrity of science.

                “The whole process is a swindle,” he states, in large part because the IPCC has a blinkered mandate that excludes natural causes of global warming.

                Dr. Gray is one of the 2,000 to 2,500 top scientists from around the world whom the IPCC often cites as forming the basis of its findings. No one has been a more faithful reviewer than Dr. Gray over the years — he has been an IPCC expert almost from the start, and perhaps its most prolific contributor, logging almost 1,900 comments on the IPCC’s final draft of its most recent report alone.

                Dr. Gray was asked to endorse this [IPCC] reform effort, but he refused, saying: “The IPCC is fundamentally corrupt. The only ‘reform’ I could envisage would be its abolition.”

                IPCC too blinkered and corrupt to save

                I hadn’t heard of Vincent Gray. Did a bit of googling, and noticed that – like me – he has a PhD in chemistry from Cambridge University; so far so good, perhaps.
                But then, found a short profile on DeSmogBlog – where it says

                Quote:
                A search of 22,000 academic journals shows that Gray has never been published in a peer-reviewed journal on the subject of climate change. Gray has published peer-reviewed scientific work on coal with the last article being published 17 years ago.

                Listed as a member of the Scientific Advisory Committee for the Natural Resource Stewardship Project (NRSP), a lobby organization that refuses to disclose it’s funding sources. The NRSP is led by executive director Tom Harris and Dr. Tim Ball. [oh dear, Dr Tim who’s prone to Ballocks – see above]

                Vincent Gray
                – hmm, a member of a committee that refuses to disclose funding sources… – and the IPCC is corrupt, eh?

                in reply to: Global warming lies and climate change hysteria #4484
                Martin W
                Participant

                  A scientific paper that’s just out says that it’s impossible to predict with certainty just how bad climate change will be (I’ve posted to new thread re this). Led to one of the most stupid blog posts I’ve seen, on American "Thinker". Includes:

                  Quote:
                  an entire Global Warming fraud industry has grown up, based on years of pseudo-scientific false alarms, and feeding scare headlines without end around the world. But the science is finally clear: Any reasonable evidence [sic] is not only missing, but can in principle not be obtained in a system as complex as the earth climate. End of story — at least among scientists with a shred of integrity left.

                  SCIENCE: Earth climate is too complex to predict Well, what bone-headed, crass crap. Not only does the writer confuse "reasonable evidence" with information needed for detailed modelling, but he also gets whole argument utterly wrong – as well as being curiously selective in what science he likes: ie most climate change science wrong, but when paper re uncertainty comes out it’s correct. I’ve posted to the writer’s blog:

                  Quote:
                  Suppose some pinko-liberal or even commie country were to go to war with the US of A – exactly how many people would die? Or even if some terrorists let off a few dirty bombs in some US cities, how many would die now and in future, inc from side effects? You can’t predict for sure? Then – according to your absurd piece on American Idiot (Thinker? – hahahaha, gimme a break) these are not real threats, and we shouldn’t do anything to prevent them happening.
                  in reply to: Bush the anti-scientist and global warming obfuscation #4401
                  Martin W
                  Participant

                    So, the days of Bush government trying to muffle news re global warming and its impacts are not over yet.
                    From Think Progress:

                    Quote:
                    CDC officials are now revealing that the White House heavily edited Gerberding’s [ie Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] testimony [to a senate committee, on “Human Impacts of Global Warming”], which originally was longer and had more “information on health risks“:

                    “It was eviscerated,” said a CDC official, familiar with both versions, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the review process.

                    The official said that while it is customary for testimony to be changed in a White House review, these changes were particularly “heavy-handed,” with the document cut from its original 14 pages to four. It was six pages as presented to the Senate committee.

                    The White House’s deletions included “details on how many people might be adversely affected because of increased warming and the scientific basis for some of the CDC’s analysis on what kinds of diseases might be spread in a warmer climate and rising sea levels.”

                    White House ‘Eviscerates’ CDC Director’s Senate Testimony On Global Warming

                    ABC News also picked up this story; report includes:

                    Quote:
                    Environmental and public health experts overwhelmingly denounced editing by the White House of a federal health agency head’s testimony to Congress Tuesday. Significant deletions were made from the testimony, concerning global warming and the potential impact on human health.
                    Story

                    The original, unedited testimony presented to Congress by Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and obtained by ABC News was 14 pages long, but the White House Office of Management and Budget edited the final version down to a mere six pages.

                    Scientists and public health organizations called the move “frustrating,” “terrible” and “appalling.” The edits essentially deleted all sections that referred to climate change as a public health concern — including the risks of increased food-borne and waterborne diseases, worsening extreme weather events, worsening air pollution and the effect of heat stress on humans.


                    Scientists Denounce Global Warming Report ‘Edits’
                    Public Health Experts Say Edits Represent Censoring of Science

                    in reply to: Global warming is well underway #4311
                    Martin W
                    Participant

                      Interesting interview transcript on Alternet; includes Bill McKibben of http://www.stepitup2007.org saying:

                      Quote:
                      [re the wildfires now raging across parts of California:] This is the kind of disaster that we see more and more of as we begin to change the basic physics and chemistry of the planet we live on. One of the people leading the really brave rescue effort out there yesterday said, one of the San Diego authorities said, this is the driest it’s been in at least ninety years. It’s dry because they’ve had terrific heat and not much rain. And those are just the conditions for that part of the world that all the modeling suggests come about when you begin to raise the temperature.

                      to call it “global warming” is correct, but almost a misnomer. What we’re really doing is adding immense amounts of energy to a system, and that energy is expressing itself in all kinds of ways: more evaporation, more precipitation, higher wind speeds, rapid melt of ice across the Arctic and across every glacial system that we know about, on and on and on.

                      It is — you know, we used to think that we were still a decade or two away from the real emergency. That’s what we would have said twenty years ago, when I wrote The End of Nature. Now, we understand, the modeling makes clear, that the planet was more finely balanced than we’ve understood. What we’ve done so far has been enough to throw every physical system on earth out of kilter.

                      What we’re fighting for now is not to prevent global warming. There is going to be some global warming; there already is. What we’re fighting for now is to keep that miserable and difficult century of global warming from turning into an absolute catastrophe that rewrites the geology and biology of this planet for eons to come.

                      Are the Wildfires in So. California Related to Global Warming?

                      in reply to: Global warming threatens biodiversity #4378
                      Martin W
                      Participant

                        From the Guardian:

                        Quote:
                        Rising global temperatures caused by climate change could trigger a huge extinction of plants and animals, according to a study. Though humans would probably survive such an event, half of the world’s species could be wiped out.

                        Scientists at the University of York and the University of Leeds examined the relationship between climate and biodiversity over the past 520m years – almost the entire fossil record – and uncovered an association between the two for the first time. When the Earth’s temperatures are in a “greenhouse” climate phase, they found that extinctions rates were relatively high. Conversely, during cooler “icehouse” conditions, biodiversity increased.

                        The results, published today in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, suggest that the predictions of a rapid rise in the Earth’s temperature due to man-made climate change could have a similar effect on biodiversity.

                        Peter Mayhew, a population ecologist at the University of York and one of the authors of the research paper, said: “Our results provide the first clear evidence that global climate may explain substantial variation in the fossil record in a simple and consistent manner. If our results hold for current warming – the magnitude of which is comparable with the long-term fluctuations in Earth climate – they suggest that extinctions will increase.”

                        Warming could wipe out half of all species

                        in reply to: CO2 emissions accelerating #4464
                        Martin W
                        Participant

                          More grim news, in Scientific American website:

                          Quote:
                          The world may finally acknowledge that global warming is a major environmental hazard. But new research shows that reducing the main greenhouse gas behind it may be even more difficult than previously believed. The reason: the world’s oceans and forests, which scientists were counting on to help hold off catastrophic rises in carbon dioxide, are already so full of CO2 that they are losing their ability to absorb this climate change culprit.

                          “For every ton of CO2 emitted [into] the atmosphere, the natural sinks are removing less carbon than before,” says biologist Josep “Pep” Canadell, executive director of the Global Carbon Project—an Australia–based research consortium devoted to analyzing the pollution behind global warming. “This trend will continue into the future.”

                          Specifically, oceans and plant growth absorbed only around 540 kilograms per metric ton (1,190 pounds per short ton) of the CO2 produced in 2006, compared with 600 kilograms per metric ton (1,322 pounds per short ton) in 2000. Coupled with an emissions growth rate of 3.3 percent—triple the growth rate of the 1990s—the atmospheric burden is now rising by nearly two parts per million of CO2 a year, the fastest growth rate since 1850, the international team of researchers reports in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA.

                          Climate Change Pollution Rising—Thanks to Overwhelmed Oceans and Plants

                          in reply to: Global warming lies and climate change hysteria #4483
                          Martin W
                          Participant

                            Newsbonkers (err, Newsbusters) perhaps a perennial place of silliness re global warming: never mind science, let’s try n blast liberals. Tho complains of liberal bias in (US) media, got a couple of items appreciating a tv report trotting out stale arguments and same old scientists (err, Timothy Ball as a climate change expert? puhleaze, good for Ballocks is all), and arguing climate change is a none issue. In one item, mysteriously says: "Despite recent developments, man can’t control the weather, much less the climate. " Err, Hello – we’re not talking about controlling the climate; this is about changing it adversely, by accident. Got some posters who might be trying to be comedians, or perhaps are serious, with things like:

                            Quote:
                            You have to watch these liberals when they talk about the children. It’s obvious they’ve found a way to indoctrinate them, to their way of thinking, and it’s going to be difficult to make them look at the truth. … On this issue, we’re going to have to depend on foreign countries to bring us the truth.

                            – and which foreign countries might these be, what with the US being one of most backwards nations re climate change? North Korea, perhaps? see this and other daftness at: John Stossel Questions Inconvenient Truths on MSM View of Global Warming

                            in reply to: Global warming threatens biodiversity #4377
                            Martin W
                            Participant

                              Not so obviously a species in peril, but further signs of change seen in New England, US, now witnessing later, duller autumn tree colours. Tourism to perhaps suffer; but also mention re fungus able to attack more.

                              Quote:
                              Forested hillsides usually riotous with reds, oranges and yellows have shown their colors only grudgingly in recent years, with many trees going straight from the dull green of late summer to the rust-brown of late fall with barely a stop at a brighter hue. "It’s nothing like it used to be," said University of Vermont plant biologist Tom Vogelmann, a Vermont native. He says autumn has become too warm to elicit New England’s richest colors. According to the National Weather Service, temperatures in Burlington have run above the 30-year averages in every September and October for the past four years, save for October 2004, when they were 0.2 degrees below average. … warmer autumns and winters have been friendly to fungi that attack some trees, particularly the red and sugar maples that provide the most dazzling colors. "The leaves fall off without ever becoming orange or yellow or red. They just go from green to brown," said Barry Rock, a forestry professor at the University of New Hampshire.

                              Climate Change Blamed for Fading Foliage

                              in reply to: Global warming threatens biodiversity #4376
                              Martin W
                              Participant
                                Quote:
                                Around 10 per cent of the world population of Balearic shearwaters has visited UK inshore waters this summer and autumn, with more than 1,200 birds being recorded from just one watchpoint near Land’s End in Cornwall.

                                The survey builds upon new research recently published in the Royal Society journal, Biology Letters, which highlights global warming as a key driver behind the upsurge in UK Balearic shearwater sightings.

                                Dr Wynn and colleagues showed how northeast Atlantic sea surface temperatures rose by 0.6 degrees Celsius in the mid-1990s, triggering a northwards shift in the Balearic shearwater’s prey fish species and with it the birds that feed on them.

                                ‘Just 20 years ago Balearic shearwaters were scarce visitors to South West waters, but they are now regularly recorded from headlands throughout the UK. Since 2003 we have even started seeing birds staying throughout the winter off Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, which is a completely new phenomenon linked to elevated winter sea temperatures,’ said Dr Wynn.

                                Dr Wynn added: ‘Climate change is often perceived to be a future threat, but the reality for our marine fauna is that it is happening now. Species towards the top of the food chain are having to respond very rapidly in order to survive, and some are going to be pushed to extinction if they fail’.

                                Climate Change Drives Endangered Seabird Into UK Waters

                                in reply to: Global warming lies and climate change hysteria #4482
                                Martin W
                                Participant

                                  The Conservative Voice – a US website – carries one of the battiest articles by a skeptic I’ve seen yet. Attempts to attack Al Gore, but just looks seriously off-kilter. Includes guff like:

                                  Quote:
                                  Gore is an embarrassment to the nation and should be recognized for being a despotic fool not someone who promoted the cause of peace. … Al Gore is a lying demagogue. Only fools like the mainstream media and left wing Marxist idiots would believe such a brain-dead imbecile or a shrewd conniving political exploiter. Global warming is a fool’s folly. Al, “We the People” are not idiots. … Folks, carbon gases and man causing global warming just ain’t so regardless how many people say it is. We the People will suffer greatly if we don’t realize what the Al Gore global warming agenda really is. Gore is promoting a communist one world order through international taxation and control over nation states. It will destroy us.

                                  The article is peppered with quotes, including from Adolf Hitler and fellow Nazi Paul Joseph Goebbels – and, bizarrely, Carl Sagan. Sagan quoted saying, “One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge — even to ourselves — that we’ve been so credulous.” – Freudian slip by the article writer? – as Carl Sagan was among the first scientists to warn of the perils of global warming, and our writer clearly a bamboozled chap. Lest you want to read this codswallop, it’s at: Al Gore’s Global Warming Lies

                                  in reply to: An Inconvenient Truth dispenses w piffling equivocations #4505
                                  Martin W
                                  Participant

                                    Another balanced piece on Gore and his Nobel, in Chicago Herald Tribune; includes:

                                    Quote:
                                    The scientific consensus on global warming looked much different when Al Gore left elective office in 2001 than it does today.

                                    Most of the remaining doubts some scientists harbored about the impact of human activity on global temperatures have disappeared in the last few years. Gore’s recital of climate facts in his movie “An Inconvenient Truth” contains some flaws, but most experts agree he is correct on the biggest point: The earth is on a path toward a perilously warm climate and the release of greenhouse gases is playing a key role.

                                    Kerry Emanuel, an atmospheric scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said he has mixed feelings about Gore’s approach. Emanuel said while Gore has helped persuade the public to take climate change seriously, his movie contains “some exaggerations that make climate scientists wince,”

                                    “There’s a lot of science in there that people have a hard time refuting,” said Jerry Melillo, director of the ecosystems center at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Massachusetts, who helped author past Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports.

                                    Science backs Gore’s premise

                                    in reply to: An Inconvenient Truth dispenses w piffling equivocations #4504
                                    Martin W
                                    Participant

                                      Al Gore and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), chaired by Indian scientist Rajendra Pachauri, who have been jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

                                      Congratulations to the two of them!

                                      – and how sad to see there’s sour grapes and sniping from right wing idiots; not even gonna bother linking to such stuff just now

                                      in reply to: Global warming is well underway #4310
                                      Martin W
                                      Participant
                                        Quote:
                                        Man-made global warming is driving up humidity levels, with the risk that rainfall patterns will shift or strengthen, tropical storms intensify and human health may suffer from heat stress, a study released on Wednesday said.

                                        From 1976 to 2004, when the world’s average surface temperature rose 0.49 degrees Celsius (0.9 degrees Fahrenheit), global levels of atmospheric water vapour rose 2.2 percent, according to the paper by British scientists.

                                        Gillett said water vapour was a “positive feedback” — a vicious circle, in scientific parlance — in the global warming equation.

                                        Steam is a greenhouse gas, meaning that like carbon pollution that results from burning fossil fuels, it traps solar heat in the atmosphere, thus stoking the warming effect and so worsening humidity.

                                        Global warming driving up humidity levels, says study

                                        in reply to: Bush the anti-scientist and global warming obfuscation #4400
                                        Martin W
                                        Participant

                                          George "Warmer" Bush isn’t going to look good in history, especially for his environmental record. Atlanta Journal-Constitution has short but scathing piece on Bush and his wobbly wimpiness re warming. Includes:

                                          Quote:
                                          During his tenure, the president first tried to deny mounting scientific evidence of global warming; later, when denial was no longer possible, he tried to downplay its importance. Even now, with the need for action as obvious as a melting glacier, he continues to deny responsibility for addressing the challenge. … As a candidate in 2000, Bush supported the 1997 Kyoto Protocol on climate change and pledged on the campaign trail to treat carbon emissions as a pollutant. Upon election, however, he morphed into a sneering global warming skeptic and then a disinterested thumb-twiddler. He leads the nation responsible for generating 25 percent of the world’s greenhouse gases, yet declines to take a decisive leadership role in fixing the problem. Unfortunately, global warming is moving much faster than the president, and much faster than scientists originally predicted.

                                          A matter of life and global warming

                                          President Bush’s hot-and-cold approach delays strategy to cut harmful gases

                                          in reply to: Global warming threatens biodiversity #4375
                                          Martin W
                                          Participant
                                            Quote:
                                            Thousands of walrus have appeared on Alaska’s northwest coast in what conservationists are calling a dramatic consequence of global warming melting the Arctic sea ice. Alaska’s walrus, especially breeding females, in summer and fall are usually found on the Arctic ice pack. But the lowest summer ice cap on record put sea ice far north of the outer continental shelf, the shallow, life-rich shelf of ocean bottom in the Bering and Chukchi seas. Walrus feed on clams, snails and other bottom dwellers. Given the choice between an ice platform over water beyond their 630-foot diving range or gathering spots on shore, thousands of walrus picked Alaska’s rocky beaches. "It looks to me like animals are shifting their distribution to find prey," said Tim Ragen, executive director of the federal Marine Mammal Commission. "The big question is whether they will be able to find sufficient prey in areas where they are looking." According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder, September sea ice was 39 percent below the long-term average from 1979 to 2000. Sea ice cover is in a downward spiral and may have passed the point of no return, with a possible ice-free Arctic Ocean by summer 2030, senior scientist Mark Serreze said. Starting in July, several thousand walrus abandoned the ice pack for gathering spots known as haulouts between Barrow and Cape Lisburne, a remote, 300-mile stretch of Alaska coastline.

                                            Receding Ice Displaces Alaska Walrus

                                            in reply to: Global warming a tough issue for the media #4413
                                            Martin W
                                            Participant

                                              From the Guardian:

                                              Quote:
                                              “The flooding in Africa just now is the worst anyone can remember,” Sir John [Holmes, a British diplomat who is also known as the UN’s under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs] said, expressing frustration at how little media attention in the west was being devoted to what he terms creeping climatic catastrophe.

                                              Climate change disaster is upon us, warns UN

                                              in reply to: Global warming is well underway #4309
                                              Martin W
                                              Participant

                                                From the Guardian:

                                                Quote:
                                                A record number of floods, droughts and storms around the world this year amount to a climate change “mega disaster”, the United Nation’s emergency relief coordinator, Sir John Holmes, has warned.

                                                Sir John, a British diplomat who is also known as the UN’s under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs, said dire predictions about the impact of global warming on humanity were already coming true.

                                                “We are seeing the effects of climate change. Any year can be a freak but the pattern looks pretty clear to be honest. That’s why we’re trying … to say, of course you’ve got to deal with mitigation of emissions, but this is here and now, this is with us already,” he said.

                                                As a measure of the worsening situation, Ocha, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs – part of the UN secretariat that employs Sir John – has issued 13 emergency “flash” appeals so far this year. The number is three more than in 2005, which held the previous record.

                                                Two years ago only half the international disasters dealt with by Ocha had anything to do with the climate; this year all but one of the 13 emergency appeals is climate-related. “

                                                Climate change disaster is upon us, warns UN

                                                in reply to: ESPN Star Sports Cricket Sometimes Live #4500
                                                Martin W
                                                Participant

                                                  Reply from Now TV:

                                                  Quote:
                                                  Thank you for emailing now TV.

                                                  With regards to your message, we are sorry to learn of your
                                                  disappointment to our Cricket Channel. Please be adivsed that your
                                                  valuable feedback has already been channeled back to the relevant
                                                  department for further review . Rest assured we would use it as
                                                  reference to future improvement, and make necessary enhancement to
                                                  ensure such quality standard is met.

                                                  in reply to: Global warming lies and climate change hysteria #4481
                                                  Martin W
                                                  Participant

                                                    I’ve never really liked Bjorn Lomborg, who shot to fame as supposed former environmentalist w claims that should we attempt to combat warming, we’d waste money that could be used to help the world in other ways. Always struck me as being rather like saying well, the house may be on fire but battling the fire will be tough, and would mean we couldn’t do so much work to re-paint the walls and improve the upholstery – and anyway, some people say the fire won’t be too bad. Strikes me, too, as very self important fellow. Already seen his claims re being former environmentalist even dodgier than Timothy Ball’s re being expert on man-made climate change. Knew of new Lomborg book; haven’t even laid eyes on it. Glad to see review in Globe and Mail that slams the book – tho sadly, the idiots who take comfort in Lomborgism will surely like the book, which can help them continue living in fools’ paradise where can drive SUVs and burn and consume and burn without consequence. From the review:

                                                    Quote:
                                                    In high-school biology class, we used to do an experiment with fruit flies. You put flies and food in a jar, screw the top on tight and wait to see what happens as the flies reproduce like mad. The goal is to see at what point the limits of the jar – air, food, space – begin to affect the ability of the fruit flies to exist. At some point, the jar becomes inhospitable and the flies die en masse. If Bjorn Lomborg, Danish author of Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide to Global Warming, were to write up that high-school experiment, he would focus on the point just before the flies began to hit the limits. He would wax on about how the population of flies had never been stronger, trot out statistics to show how astoundingly well the population had reproduced over time, and gush boyishly about the excellent living conditions in the jar. … he would be correct on carefully selected points of fact, but fatally incorrect about the larger picture, or the meaning of the information he was looking at. This is the trick he plays in Cool It, and it is the same tack he took in The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World (2001). … He’s not a scientist, and the book of science, alas, is closed to him. His work betrays, embarrassingly, that he doesn’t understand biology or how living systems work or any of the basic principles of scientific inquiry. … Lomborg has now proved beyond a doubt that he is incapable of contributing anything of merit to scientific discourse.

                                                    The Pollyanna of global warming

                                                    in reply to: Global warming forecasts: disasters, diseases #4357
                                                    Martin W
                                                    Participant

                                                      Alternet has long list of predictions re global warming, from the Center for American Progress. A few seem trivial; most serious. Include:

                                                      Quote:
                                                      Say Hello to Bulgarian Hooker Shortages. “Brothel owners in Bulgaria are blaming global warming for staff shortages. They claim their best girls are working in ski resorts because a lack of snow has forced tourists to seek other pleasures.”

                                                      Species Disappear. The latest report from the World Conservation Union says that a minimum of 40 percent of the world’s species are being threatened … and global warming’s one of the main culprits.

                                                      Greenland’s Melting. Greenland is melting at a rate of 52 cubic miles per year — much faster than once predicted. If Greenland ‘s entire 2.5 million cubic kilometers of ice were to melt, it would lead to a global sea level rise of 7.2 meters, or more than 23 feet.

                                                      IISS: “A Global Catastrophe” For International Security. A recent study done by the International Institute for Strategic Studies has likened the international security effects of global warming to those caused by nuclear war.

                                                      The World’s Checkbook. A study by the Global Development and Environment Institute at Tufts University found that ignoring global warming would end up costing $20 trillion by 2100.

                                                      Top 100 Ways Global Warming Will Change Your Life

                                                      in reply to: Global warming solutions? – geo-engineering? PV cells? #4335
                                                      Martin W
                                                      Participant

                                                        Wave power seems promising as way to help reduce reliance on burning fossil fuels. BBC reporting on large test project to start in Scotland.

                                                        Quote:
                                                        One of the world’s largest wave energy projects is to be unveiled off the coast of Orkney. First Minister Alex Salmond is to open the new testing facility for tidal energy at the European Marine Energy Centre (EMEC) in Stromness. The site will house four wave energy converters, capable of generating electricity for 2,000 homes. The centre is said to be the first of its kind in the world to provide a purpose-built testing facility.

                                                        Plan to harness Orkney wave power

                                                        in reply to: Global warming solutions? – geo-engineering? PV cells? #4334
                                                        Martin W
                                                        Participant

                                                          In letter to Nature, James Lovelock (of Gaia hypothesis) and Chris Rapley suggest using:

                                                          Quote:
                                                          free-floating or tethered vertical pipes to increase the mixing of nutrient-rich waters below the thermocline with the relatively barren waters at the ocean surface…. Water pumped up pipes — say, 100 to 200 metres long, 10 metres in diameter and with a one-way flap valve at the lower end for pumping by wave movement — would fertilize algae in the surface waters and encourage them to bloom. This would pump down carbon dioxide and produce dimethyl sulphide, the precursor of nuclei that form sunlight-reflecting clouds.

                                                          Ocean pipes could help the Earth to cure itself
                                                          Article on Nat Geog site says they’ve done laboratory experiments showing this may be feasible, and now have sponsor to start small scale trial.
                                                          But, plenty of uncertainties – the pipes may exhale CO2 as process begins, then may disrupt ocean cycles and impact marine life.
                                                          Giant Ocean Tubes Proposed as Global Warming Fix

                                                          in reply to: Bush the anti-scientist and global warming obfuscation #4399
                                                          Martin W
                                                          Participant

                                                            Though certain energy industry types and allies/near allies keep churning out disinformation, even George Bush is being persuaded global warming is a real issue – but still figuring it’s best to talk rather than act.

                                                            Reuters has short timeline, showing how his views have changed. Includes:

                                                            Quote:
                                                            June 11, 2001 – Shortly before his Europe tour, Bush says it remains uncertain how much of global warming is caused by humans and pledges to use science and diplomacy to fight it.

                                                            June 4, 2002 – Bush distances himself from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s report to the United Nations on the negative effect of global warming, saying it was a “bureaucratic” hot air.

                                                            January 23, 2007 – Bush mentions global warming for the first time in his State of the Union speech, saying solutions to the problem lie in technological advances and the use of renewable fuels like ethanol.

                                                            FACTBOX-Bush’s evolving policy on global warming

                                                            in reply to: Global warming lies and climate change hysteria #4480
                                                            Martin W
                                                            Participant

                                                              Really, many a global warming "skeptic" should be more laughable than treated as if serious people. Retired Canadian professor Timothy Ball makes a strong bid for being among the more comical denialists.

                                                              Heck, I have a thread here suggesting Comical Ali has been recruited to say global warming isn't real, but a few minutes reading about Timothy Ball and find he almost outdoes Comical Ali.

                                                              I just noticed Timothy Ball's name in news item on National Geographic; this includes:

                                                              Quote:
                                                              Timothy Ball chairs the Scientific Advisory Committee for the Natural Resources Stewardship Project, a federally incorporated nonprofit in Canada. He says his skepticism is based on assumptions about global warming that have never been confirmed. "In this case it is assumed carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that will trap heat in the atmosphere, that the levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide will increase because of human industrial activity and specifically the burning of fossil fuels, and that atmospheric carbon dioxide will double," he said. Ball said that this hypothesis became fact before the research had begun, "because it fit a political agenda and the views of the environmentalists."

                                                              Global Warming Inaction More Costly Than Solutions?

                                                              Reading this, looked like some Ballocks in these quotes; including the very strange "it is assumed that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that will trap heat in the atmosphere".

                                                              Note to ex-Prof Ball – and Nat Geo news team: carbon dioxide is a known greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere. See, for instance: NCDC:Greenhouse Gases from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

                                                              Interesting, too, that Ball alleges the greenhouse effect hypothesis had political origins. Yet, read a little and soon find Ball is associated with groups etc funded by oil industry money. One of them dubbed Friends of Science – a name George Orwell could have loved, as questions science change, does not disclose funding sources yet perhaps gets money from oil industry etc. Friends of Science – Wikipedia entry

                                                              There's strong article by Charles Montgomery, which first appeared in the Globe and Mail, centred on Timothy Ball. Includes:

                                                              Quote:
                                                              Leaders throughout Europe have accepted the IPCC position on climate change, and have been looking for ways to take collective action, primarily via the Kyoto Accord. Yet North Americans have lagged behind, hamstrung by a lingering debate in the media and among politicians about climate science. … who are the donors? No one will say. "[The money's] not exclusively from the oil and gas industry," says Prof. Cooper. "It's also from foundations and individuals. I can't tell you the names of those companies, or the foundations for that matter, or the individuals."

                                                              When pushed in another interview, however, Prof. Cooper admits, "There were some oil companies." [PR Company boss James Hoggan, who has couple of people investigating skeptics' funding]: 'I don't think that the people who are involved in this should be able to get away with it. My goal is to find out as much as we can about these people and make it public. Who are they? Who is paying them? What motivates them? How is it they can sleep at night?" '

                                                              Mr. Cool Nurturing doubt about climate change is big business

                                                              See also brief Bio of Ball, w some of his Ballocks, on DeSmogBlog. Dr. Tim Ball: The Lie that Just Won't Die

                                                              From here and other info, soon find he can't even get basic facts about himself right, let alone re warming: has claimed to have been a professor for 32 year – true figure, 8 years; and to have the first PhD in climatology, when others had such PhDs before him: and his PhD in science/geography.

                                                              Plus, maybe only four papers published in peer reviewed journals; none dealing with human impacts on climate; none since he retired in 1996. Hardly seems the right guy, then, to make assertions like "The majority of the scientists who are on the Kyoto and global warming bandwagon know nothing about the science…"

                                                              Err, Doc Ball – do you happen to have a mirror handy? – look in it and you might recognise yourself here.

                                                              Update, 21 January 2011: ex-Prof Ball has been peddling more twaddle, in Canada Free Press – which seems a bastion of denialism, yet has clearly found Ball proved too outlandish even for this stance:

                                                              Quote:
                                                              On January 10, 2011, Canada Free Press began publishing on this website an article by Dr. Tim Ball entitled “Corruption of Climate Change Has Created 30 Lost Years” which contained untrue and disparaging statements about Dr. Andrew Weaver, who is a professor in the School of Earth and Ocean Sciences at the University of Victoria, British Columbia.

                                                              Contrary to what was stated in Dr. Ball’s article, Dr. Weaver: (1) never announced he will not participate in the next IPCC; (2) never said that the IPCC chairman should resign; (3) never called for the IPCC’s approach to science to be overhauled; and (4) did not begin withdrawing from the IPCC in January 2010. 

                                                              As a result of a nomination process that began in January, 2010, Dr. Weaver became a Lead Author for Chapter 12: “Long-term Climate Change: Projections, Commitments and Irreversibility” of the Working Group I contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC.”  That work began in May, 2010.  Dr. Ball’s article failed to mention these facts although they are publicly-available.

                                                              Dr. Tim Ball also wrongly suggested that Dr. Weaver tried to interfere with his presentation at the University of Victoria by having his students deter people from attending and heckling him during the talk.  CFP accepts without reservation there is no basis for such allegations. 

                                                              CFP also wishes to dissociate itself from any suggestion that Dr. Weaver “knows very little about climate science.”  We entirely accept that he has a well-deserved international reputation as a climate scientist and that Dr. Ball’s attack on his credentials is unjustified.

                                                              CFP sincerely apologizes to Dr. Weaver and expresses regret for the embarrassment and distress caused by the unfounded allegations in the article by Dr. Ball.

                                                              Apology to Dr. Andrew Weaver

                                                              Yikes! I haven't seen original article, but seems only thing Ball got right in his piece was Dr Weaver's name!

                                                              in reply to: Global warming a tough issue for the media #4412
                                                              Martin W
                                                              Participant

                                                                After seeing news item on National Geographic, sent this to them; maybe self-explanatory:

                                                                Quote:
                                                                In article re climate change inaction and costs, I believe you have tumbled into the trap re journalism supposedly requiring balance.

                                                                In quoting Timothy Ball, did you check re him and NSRC:
                                                                See DeSmogBlog profile of Ball, say:
                                                                http://www.desmogblog.com/node/1272
                                                                What kind of “expert” has published only 4 papers that can be found; and no original research in last 11 years, even though prolific in producing “popular” articles, and is in groups that reveal to disclose funding and/or have strong ties to oil industry monies?

                                                                Maybe in news, can also have “balanced” items re evolution, plate tectonics.
                                                                Except with these, far less of import is at stake.

                                                                And as for journalism, “balance” – of rather bogus nature – does not always happen. Do we get balance re, say paedophilia [where I believe are a very few arguing it’s ok]?

                                                                The Nat Geo news item is at:
                                                                Global Warming Inaction More Costly Than Solutions?

                                                              Viewing 30 posts - 61 through 90 (of 696 total)