Berkeley Earth Project

[westwall]

There are around 2000 glaciers that are growing in the Himalaya.

Record snowfall in HP revives 2,000 glaciers - The Economic Times

These are the glaciers in Norway that are known to be growing again,
Ålfotbreen Glacier
Briksdalsbreen Glacier
Nigardsbreen Glacier
Hardangerjøkulen Glacier
Hansebreen Glacier
Jostefonn Glacier
Engabreen glacier

In Canada these two are increasing,
Helm Glacier
Place Glacier

The Silvretta Glacier is growing in Switzerland and there are a few growing in the Italian Alps and one in France if memory serves.

Again with the third world tabloids accounts? Do you have a legitimate science journal government agency, or university reference?

Mass Balance Approach to Study Glaciers Dynamics in the Himalayas - SpringerLink - Abstract

There is a strong evidence that the glaciers of the Himalayas are in the process of a rapid meltdown. The implications of this development will be broad and sweeping for the river systems and more generally for the water resources of South Asia. The consequences will be grave for food production and livelihood of hundreds of millions of people...

A model study of the energy and mass balance of Chhota Shigri glacier in the Western Himalaya, India - http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/5/95/2011/tcd-5-95-2011.pdf

...The aggregate mass balance of Himalaya mountain glaciers has been negative during the last decades (Ren et al., 2006) with some exceptions in the higher Karakoram
mountain range (Hewitt, 2005). This conforms to a global trend, in which Himalaya
glaciers are in the medium range of glacier wastage. Despite the growing interest
25 in Himalaya glaciers observations of glacier mass balance in the region are relatively
sparse owing to the difficulties of field work in remote and politically unstable areas
(IGOS, 2007; Inman, 2010). Remote sensing estimates have confirmed overall negative
mass balances for the Western Himalaya and a recent acceleration of glacier
wastage in the region (Berthier et al., 2007)...

Spatially variable response of Himalayan glaciers to climate change affected by debris cover - http://geokomm.de/media/de/ScherlerPaper.pdf

Controversy about the current state and future evolution of Himalayan glaciers has been stirred up by erroneous statements in the fourth report by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change1,2. Variable retreat rates 3–6 and a paucity of glacial mass-balance data7,8 make it difficult to develop a coherent picture of regional climate-change
impacts in the region. Here, we report remotely-sensed frontal changes and surface velocities from glaciers in the greater Himalaya between 2000 and 2008 that provide evidence for strong spatial variations in glacier behaviour which are linked to topography and climate...
...When mass-balance data are unavailable, scientists often refer to glacier retreats and advances as indicators of their response to climate change7,14, but frontal changes are not unambiguous indicators. Supraglacial debris cover influences the terminus dynamics and can thereby modify a glacier's response to climate change. In the central Himalaya, recent studies found several debris covered glaciers with stagnant, that is, non-flowing, glacier reaches that extend several kilometres upstream from their termini15,16. Although growing meltwater ponds and surface lowering indicate that such glaciers are currently shrinking, their fronts remain remarkably stable17, as also been observed in other regions18,19. So far, however, the significance of debris cover and its impact on regional differences in the frontal dynamics of Himalayan glaciers has not been established at the mountain-belt scale...
...According to simple modelling, the length change and timescale of a glacier's response to climate change are inversely proportional to its surface slope and also depend on local climate and glacier size14. However, these factors do not adequately explain the observed different retreat rates between debris-free and debris-covered glaciers (Supplementary Figs S4,S5). In summary, widespread debris cover on many Himalayan glaciers reduces
their retreat rates, which are therefore unsuitable as indicators of recent climate change. Nevertheless, glaciers with extensive stagnant reaches indicate negative mass balances1517, and have the potential to build up hazardous moraine-dammed lakes15,19...

The India Times is a well respected newspaper in India and for your information Tamil Nadu is more completely wired for high speed internet than the USA. The MIDDLE CLASS of India numbers 300 million people and their GDP is growing exponentially. Mumbai has 800,000 diamond cutters alone, third world? Hardly, second world for sure and closing in rapidly on First World status. India has 177 universities and university level institutions with over 4 million students enrolled. They have 96 engineering colleges alone and crush the US in total output of doctoral level engineering students produced every year.

Nice try but as usual you exhibit a complete lack of knowledge about the subject....like most alarmist silly people.

 

[asterism]

a new global temperature data set is being prepared at Berkeley and should be online in the next few weeks. all the data and methodologies will be freely accessable.

my question is what differences do the posters here think will stand out? personally I am looking forward to seeing how they handle the much larger uncertainties in areas outside of northern hemisphere countries, and UHI everywhere. interesting times and I predict both sides will be pissed off.

My question is how open are they going to be about the methodologies used to normalize the data sets? Will they release the source code to replicate the results? Are they going to hire actual computer programmers to implement the algorithms designed by people trained in statistics? Will regression analyses be performed and published?

 

[asterism]

sorry, I forgot to put up a link

Muller calls his latest obsession the Berkeley Earth project. The aim is so simple that the complexity and magnitude of the undertaking is easy to miss. Starting from scratch, with new computer tools and more data than has ever been used, they will arrive at an independent assessment of global warming. The team will also make every piece of data it uses – 1.6bn data points – freely available on a website. It will post its workings alongside, including full information on how more than 100 years of data from thousands of instruments around the world are stitched together to give a historic record of the planet's temperature.

Muller is fed up with the politicised row that all too often engulfs climate science. By laying all its data and workings out in the open, where they can be checked and challenged by anyone, the Berkeley team hopes to achieve something remarkable: a broader consensus on global warming. In no other field would Muller's dream seem so ambitious, or perhaps, so naive.

Among the trickiest errors to deal with are so-called systematic biases, which skew temperature measurements in fiendishly complex ways. Stations get moved around, replaced with newer models, or swapped for instruments that record in celsius instead of fahrenheit. The times measurements are taken varies, from say 6am to 9pm. The accuracy of individual stations drift over time and even changes in the surroundings, such as growing trees, can shield a station more from wind and sun one year to the next. Each of these interferes with a station's temperature measurements, perhaps making it read too cold, or too hot. And these errors combine and build up.

This is the real mess that will take a Herculean effort to clean up. The Berkeley Earth team is using algorithms that automatically correct for some of the errors, a strategy Muller favours because it doesn't rely on human interference. When the team publishes its results, this is where the scrutiny will be most intense.

Despite the scale of the task, and the fact that world-class scientific organisations have been wrestling with it for decades, Muller is convinced his approach will lead to a better assessment of how much the world is warming. "I've told the team I don't know if global warming is more or less than we hear, but I do believe we can get a more precise number, and we can do it in a way that will cool the arguments over climate change, if nothing else," says Muller. "Science has its weaknesses and it doesn't have a stranglehold on the truth, but it has a way of approaching technical issues that is a closer approximation of truth than any other method we have."

Can a group of scientists in California end the war on climate change? | Science | The Guardian

The fix is in I think.

Wanna know how you get a predetermined result in a valid statistical poll of around 1000 people?

Poll 100,000 people and crunch the data.

 

[Old Rocks]

There are around 2000 glaciers that are growing in the Himalaya.

Record snowfall in HP revives 2,000 glaciers - The Economic Times

These are the glaciers in Norway that are known to be growing again,
Ålfotbreen Glacier
Briksdalsbreen Glacier
Nigardsbreen Glacier
Hardangerjøkulen Glacier
Hansebreen Glacier
Jostefonn Glacier
Engabreen glacier

In Canada these two are increasing,
Helm Glacier
Place Glacier

The Silvretta Glacier is growing in Switzerland and there are a few growing in the Italian Alps and one in France if memory serves.

Again with the third world tabloids accounts? Do you have a legitimate science journal government agency, or university reference?

Mass Balance Approach to Study Glaciers Dynamics in the Himalayas - SpringerLink - Abstract


A model study of the energy and mass balance of Chhota Shigri glacier in the Western Himalaya, India - http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/5/95/2011/tcd-5-95-2011.pdf


Spatially variable response of Himalayan glaciers to climate change affected by debris cover - http://geokomm.de/media/de/ScherlerPaper.pdf

Controversy about the current state and future evolution of Himalayan glaciers has been stirred up by erroneous statements in the fourth report by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change1,2. Variable retreat rates 3–6 and a paucity of glacial mass-balance data7,8 make it difficult to develop a coherent picture of regional climate-change
impacts in the region. Here, we report remotely-sensed frontal changes and surface velocities from glaciers in the greater Himalaya between 2000 and 2008 that provide evidence for strong spatial variations in glacier behaviour which are linked to topography and climate...
...When mass-balance data are unavailable, scientists often refer to glacier retreats and advances as indicators of their response to climate change7,14, but frontal changes are not unambiguous indicators. Supraglacial debris cover influences the terminus dynamics and can thereby modify a glacier's response to climate change. In the central Himalaya, recent studies found several debris covered glaciers with stagnant, that is, non-flowing, glacier reaches that extend several kilometres upstream from their termini15,16. Although growing meltwater ponds and surface lowering indicate that such glaciers are currently shrinking, their fronts remain remarkably stable17, as also been observed in other regions18,19. So far, however, the significance of debris cover and its impact on regional differences in the frontal dynamics of Himalayan glaciers has not been established at the mountain-belt scale...
...According to simple modelling, the length change and timescale of a glacier's response to climate change are inversely proportional to its surface slope and also depend on local climate and glacier size14. However, these factors do not adequately explain the observed different retreat rates between debris-free and debris-covered glaciers (Supplementary Figs S4,S5). In summary, widespread debris cover on many Himalayan glaciers reduces
their retreat rates, which are therefore unsuitable as indicators of recent climate change. Nevertheless, glaciers with extensive stagnant reaches indicate negative mass balances1517, and have the potential to build up hazardous moraine-dammed lakes15,19...

The India Times is a well respected newspaper in India and for your information Tamil Nadu is more completely wired for high speed internet than the USA. The MIDDLE CLASS of India numbers 300 million people and their GDP is growing exponentially. Mumbai has 800,000 diamond cutters alone, third world? Hardly, second world for sure and closing in rapidly on First World status. India has 177 universities and university level institutions with over 4 million students enrolled. They have 96 engineering colleges alone and crush the US in total output of doctoral level engineering students produced every year.

Nice try but as usual you exhibit a complete lack of knowledge about the subject....like most alarmist silly people.

All of which still does not change the fact that you were given scientific articles, and replied with a newspaper article.

 

[Trakar]

The India Times is a well respected newspaper in India and for your information Tamil Nadu is more completely wired for high speed internet than the USA. The MIDDLE CLASS of India numbers 300 million people and their GDP is growing exponentially. Mumbai has 800,000 diamond cutters alone, third world? Hardly, second world for sure and closing in rapidly on First World status. India has 177 universities and university level institutions with over 4 million students enrolled. They have 96 engineering colleges alone and crush the US in total output of doctoral level engineering students produced every year.

Nice try but as usual you exhibit a complete lack of knowledge about the subject....like most alarmist silly people.

Lordy, first science and logic, now history, economics and geopolitics, I generally collect a fee for tutoring, and usually don't take on undergrads."Third world" is a term that was developed by economist Alfred Sauvy back in 1952 in an article he wrote for L'Observateur. It was an intended allusion to the "Third Estate" of the French Revolution.

In French "Tiers monde" means third world, and refers to "one-third," it was not intended to signify "third in rank" (which would be troisieme monde). The phrase gained popularity during the Cold War when many non-aligned nations adopted the moniker to differentiate and distinguish themselves as not being aligned with NATO or the Warsaw Pact. The term "First World" was generally understood to mean the United States and its allies in the Cold War, the "Second World" was the Soviet block nations and their allies.

With the fall of the Soviet Union, the term has lost much of its meaning, it isn't a term that directly relates to the wealth or advancement of a nation. But if it were, India with a per capita annual GDP equivilant of ~$1,100/year (as compared to Belize at $8,400/year, Haiti at $1,200/year, and Afghanistan at $1,000/year) would probably still find itself in that category.

Otherwise, it is still an Opinion Editorial (Op-Ed) column in a popular press daily publication. This is not even close to a legitimate scientific reference.

 

[IanC]

a new global temperature data set is being prepared at Berkeley and should be online in the next few weeks. all the data and methodologies will be freely accessable.

my question is what differences do the posters here think will stand out? personally I am looking forward to seeing how they handle the much larger uncertainties in areas outside of northern hemisphere countries, and UHI everywhere. interesting times and I predict both sides will be pissed off.

My question is how open are they going to be about the methodologies used to normalize the data sets? Will they release the source code to replicate the results? Are they going to hire actual computer programmers to implement the algorithms designed by people trained in statistics? Will regression analyses be performed and published?

their claim is that there will be total transparency. they have statistians working on the algorithyms but that is no guarantee that everyone will agree with them. I think it is a good first step in cleaning up the mess that is the present climate science.

 

[IanC]

Traker- you are simply appealing to authority, and confusing publishing bias for consensus. I agree that this is a reasonable position to take ordinarily but climate science is no ordinary case. the science has been corrupted by one sided funding and political peer review.

you consider climategate to be a conspiracy theory. understandable if you dont actually look at the evidence and just trust the excuses. very unsettling if you examine the evidence.

there are lots of threads here and I think you should go back and read some of them. you talk in generalities and ask for links by climate science authorities to prove the skeptical side. unfortunatly the skeptic seldom get published. a great place for you to start would be Steig09 in Nature and the rebuttal by ODonnell10. the original should never have passed peer review let alone make the cover of Nature. the rebuttal had to through amazing and lengthy contortions just to get published in a secondary journal even though the destruction of Steig09 was obvious. and of course Nature has not pulled Stieg09 or even added a note about the rebuttal. business as usual in climate science. and dont even get me started on Mann's Hockey Stick.

 

[westwall]

Again with the third world tabloids accounts? Do you have a legitimate science journal government agency, or university reference?

Mass Balance Approach to Study Glaciers Dynamics in the Himalayas - SpringerLink - Abstract


A model study of the energy and mass balance of Chhota Shigri glacier in the Western Himalaya, India - http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/5/95/2011/tcd-5-95-2011.pdf


Spatially variable response of Himalayan glaciers to climate change affected by debris cover - http://geokomm.de/media/de/ScherlerPaper.pdf

The India Times is a well respected newspaper in India and for your information Tamil Nadu is more completely wired for high speed internet than the USA. The MIDDLE CLASS of India numbers 300 million people and their GDP is growing exponentially. Mumbai has 800,000 diamond cutters alone, third world? Hardly, second world for sure and closing in rapidly on First World status. India has 177 universities and university level institutions with over 4 million students enrolled. They have 96 engineering colleges alone and crush the US in total output of doctoral level engineering students produced every year.

Nice try but as usual you exhibit a complete lack of knowledge about the subject....like most alarmist silly people.

All of which still does not change the fact that you were given scientific articles, and replied with a newspaper article.

No, we were given heavily biased non peer (based on the rampant corruption exposed in the CLIMATEGATE scandal) reviewed studies. I gave a respected newspapers story that was reporting what very well respected scientists had to say about the current state of Himalayan glaciation. It takes months and sometimes years for peer reviewed studies to be written so timely information is allways released through regular media outlets.

But as usual, you alarmists attack the source of the information instead of addressing what the information is.

 

[westwall]

The India Times is a well respected newspaper in India and for your information Tamil Nadu is more completely wired for high speed internet than the USA. The MIDDLE CLASS of India numbers 300 million people and their GDP is growing exponentially. Mumbai has 800,000 diamond cutters alone, third world? Hardly, second world for sure and closing in rapidly on First World status. India has 177 universities and university level institutions with over 4 million students enrolled. They have 96 engineering colleges alone and crush the US in total output of doctoral level engineering students produced every year.

Nice try but as usual you exhibit a complete lack of knowledge about the subject....like most alarmist silly people.

Lordy, first science and logic, now history, economics and geopolitics, I generally collect a fee for tutoring, and usually don't take on undergrads."Third world" is a term that was developed by economist Alfred Sauvy back in 1952 in an article he wrote for L'Observateur. It was an intended allusion to the "Third Estate" of the French Revolution.

In French "Tiers monde" means third world, and refers to "one-third," it was not intended to signify "third in rank" (which would be troisieme monde). The phrase gained popularity during the Cold War when many non-aligned nations adopted the moniker to differentiate and distinguish themselves as not being aligned with NATO or the Warsaw Pact. The term "First World" was generally understood to mean the United States and its allies in the Cold War, the "Second World" was the Soviet block nations and their allies.

With the fall of the Soviet Union, the term has lost much of its meaning, it isn't a term that directly relates to the wealth or advancement of a nation. But if it were, India with a per capita annual GDP equivilant of ~$1,100/year (as compared to Belize at $8,400/year, Haiti at $1,200/year, and Afghanistan at $1,000/year) would probably still find itself in that category.

Otherwise, it is still an Opinion Editorial (Op-Ed) column in a popular press daily publication. This is not even close to a legitimate scientific reference.

What was that olfraud? You gave yourself away with that "lordy". BUSTED!

 

[westwall]

Traker- you are simply appealing to authority, and confusing publishing bias for consensus. I agree that this is a reasonable position to take ordinarily but climate science is no ordinary case. the science has been corrupted by one sided funding and political peer review.

you consider climategate to be a conspiracy theory. understandable if you dont actually look at the evidence and just trust the excuses. very unsettling if you examine the evidence.

there are lots of threads here and I think you should go back and read some of them. you talk in generalities and ask for links by climate science authorities to prove the skeptical side. unfortunatly the skeptic seldom get published. a great place for you to start would be Steig09 in Nature and the rebuttal by ODonnell10. the original should never have passed peer review let alone make the cover of Nature. the rebuttal had to through amazing and lengthy contortions just to get published in a secondary journal even though the destruction of Steig09 was obvious. and of course Nature has not pulled Stieg09 or even added a note about the rebuttal. business as usual in climate science. and dont even get me started on Mann's Hockey Stick.

Trakars use of some common olfraud tactics and his use of the word "lordy", a fav of olfraud, expose him as a olfraud sock puppet. How pathetic is that.

 

[IanC]

The India Times is a well respected newspaper in India and for your information Tamil Nadu is more completely wired for high speed internet than the USA. The MIDDLE CLASS of India numbers 300 million people and their GDP is growing exponentially. Mumbai has 800,000 diamond cutters alone, third world? Hardly, second world for sure and closing in rapidly on First World status. India has 177 universities and university level institutions with over 4 million students enrolled. They have 96 engineering colleges alone and crush the US in total output of doctoral level engineering students produced every year.

Nice try but as usual you exhibit a complete lack of knowledge about the subject....like most alarmist silly people.

Lordy, first science and logic, now history, economics and geopolitics, I generally collect a fee for tutoring, and usually don't take on undergrads."Third world" is a term that was developed by economist Alfred Sauvy back in 1952 in an article he wrote for L'Observateur. It was an intended allusion to the "Third Estate" of the French Revolution.

In French "Tiers monde" means third world, and refers to "one-third," it was not intended to signify "third in rank" (which would be troisieme monde). The phrase gained popularity during the Cold War when many non-aligned nations adopted the moniker to differentiate and distinguish themselves as not being aligned with NATO or the Warsaw Pact. The term "First World" was generally understood to mean the United States and its allies in the Cold War, the "Second World" was the Soviet block nations and their allies.

With the fall of the Soviet Union, the term has lost much of its meaning, it isn't a term that directly relates to the wealth or advancement of a nation. But if it were, India with a per capita annual GDP equivilant of ~$1,100/year (as compared to Belize at $8,400/year, Haiti at $1,200/year, and Afghanistan at $1,000/year) would probably still find itself in that category.

Otherwise, it is still an Opinion Editorial (Op-Ed) column in a popular press daily publication. This is not even close to a legitimate scientific reference.

What was that olfraud? You gave yourself away with that "lordy". BUSTED!

hahahahahahahaha. I think Old Rocks has been outed!

 

[Old Rocks]

Funny beyond belief. Lordy is an exclamation common to the older generation. Politier than saying whan an unbelievable dumb fuck.

No, I am not Trakar, nor vice-versa. Two very differant men with vastly differant backgrounds.

 

[westwall]

Funny beyond belief. Lordy is an exclamation common to the older generation. Politier than saying whan an unbelievable dumb fuck.

No, I am not Trakar, nor vice-versa. Two very differant men with vastly differant backgrounds.

Sure you are olfraud, sure you are. Got your goat didn't we! Misspelling all over the place, you must be spluttering in your coffee!

 

[Trakar]

Traker- you are simply appealing to authority, and confusing publishing bias for consensus. I agree that this is a reasonable position to take ordinarily but climate science is no ordinary case. the science has been corrupted by one sided funding and political peer review.

you consider climategate to be a conspiracy theory. understandable if you dont actually look at the evidence and just trust the excuses. very unsettling if you examine the evidence...

"Trakar"

Back to the logic tutoring

"appeal to authority" - appeal to authority - logical fallacies - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com

...Finally, it should be noted that it is not irrelevant to cite an authority to support a claim one is not competent to judge. However, in such cases the authority must be speaking in his or her own field of expertise and the claim should be one that other experts in the field do not generally consider to be controversial. In a field such as physics, it is reasonable to believe a claim about something in physics made by a physicist that most other physicists consider to be true. Presumably, they believe it because there is strong evidence in support of it. Such beliefs could turn out to be false, of course, but it should be obvious that no belief becomes true on the basis of who believes it...

My personal competence in the field of Climate science is only measurable by the posts I make on this site, as my statements and understandings, however, are consistent with the experts in climate science I cite and the mainstream science sources easily and independently verifiable, my use of published science reference and cite is not akin to the logical fallacy of an appeal to authority.

Every official investigation of the criminal hacking of the CRU computer system has so far, failed to find any evidence of any serious misconduct on the part of the involved scientists. nor have they found any problem with the climate science those researchers worked upon. If you are aware of any official finding that supports your contentions please link to them.

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm79/7934/7934.pdf

http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/CRUstatements/SAP

http://live.psu.edu/fullimg/userpics/10026/Final_Investigation_Report.pdf

The most recent report from the investigation Imhofe instigated: http://www.oig.doc.gov/oig/reports/2011/001688.html

 

[IanC]

OK Trakar, I'll bite.

first off, have you familiarized yourself with the controversies brought up by the release of the climategate emails? have you read the reports on the three main inquiries? and the two parliamentary inquiries into the inquiries of UEA? or the history of Mann's hockey stick papers and the attempted rebuttals, especially by McIntyre and McKitrick?

I am not asking these questions to make you look uninformed, I am asking them to see if you know the implications of many of the emails, one in particular.

From: Phil Jones
To: “Michael E. Mann”
Subject: IPCC & FOI
Date: Thu May 29 1111 2008

Mike,

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t
have his new email address.

We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

this appears to be a straight forward case of conspiracy to thwart the FOI act, a crime. I could go into the reasons why they wanted these emails hidden but I will leave that for another time. Muir-Russell's inquiry was supposed to investigate whether there was any wrong doing. surely this blatant call to remove evidence of unethical dealings within the IPCC AR4 would be worth looking into, right? wrong. Jones was not asked if he deleted those emails, nor apparently were Mann, Keith (Briffa), Gene (Wahl) or Caspar (Annan).

If you still believe that the inquiries were anything but whitewashes, I would have to call you gullible in the extreme. BTW, Wahl has since stated that he did delete the emails. Mann and Jones have publicly stated that they did not delete their emails but refuse to produce them. Mann and the universities he is affiliated with have just about run out of appeals to stymie the release of those emails and others. the fallout when they become public will be incredibly toxic to climate science in particular but unfortunately to science in general.

I have asked Old Rocks many times whether he supports the ethics and methods used by Mann and Jones over the years. I will ask you (if you are not just a sock puppet) if you still support the thoroughness and competence of the inquiries if what I say is true.

 

[IanC]

come on Trakar, its a straight forward question and you've made close to a dozen posts since I asked it. If What I said is true, will you still believe that the inquiries were thorough and competent and came to the rightful conclusion that the climategate principals were 'unguilty'?

 

[Trakar]

OK Trakar, I'll bite.

first off, have you familiarized yourself with the controversies brought up by the release of the climategate emails? have you read the reports on the three main inquiries? and the two parliamentary inquiries into the inquiries of UEA? or the history of Mann's hockey stick papers and the attempted rebuttals, especially by McIntyre and McKitrick?
...

I have, in fact I linked to all of the investigations I am aware of. If you are aware of any other offical investigations I will be happy to look at their findings.

McIntyre and McKitrick's attempted rebuttals did raise a few valid issues, though the corrections suggested by the valid issues raised did not significantly alter or change "the Hockey-stick."

Wahl and Ammann (2007)
http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/ccr/ammann/millennium/refs/Wahl_ClimChange2007.pdf

As for Jones, no, his request, regardless of intent or circumstance, was ethically deficient at best. The fact, however that it was never acted upon by either party, as the evidence demonstrates, tells me that while an inappropriate comment, it was most likely no different than any of the huffing and puffing that is evident upon most messageboards and and text exchanges among millions of ordinary people everyday.

 

[Trakar]

come on Trakar, its a straight forward question and you've made close to a dozen posts since I asked it. If What I said is true, will you still believe that the inquiries were thorough and competent and came to the rightful conclusion that the climategate principals were 'unguilty'?

I rarely sit on a board and respond post for post with individuals. I respond to new posts that are up when I sign on, in the order I read them, if I feel inspired to respond, and then I move to the next board. Sometimes, before I sign off I'll go back and answer subsequent responses, but most of the time it is once through and the rest will wait till the next time I sign on.

Likewise, especially when I am on this late at night, it is because I am filling in time while performing other business related functions that do not require my undivided time, so I may occassionally be online but otherwise occupied.

 

[IanC]

As for Jones, no, his request, regardless of intent or circumstance, was ethically deficient at best. The fact, however that it was never acted upon by either party, as the evidence demonstrates, tells me that while an inappropriate comment, it was most likely no different than any of the huffing and puffing that is evident upon most messageboards and and text exchanges among millions of ordinary people everyday.

ahhh, we are getting somewhere. you agree that Jones was ethically deficient at best.

what about the Muir Russell inquiry? if M-R states that he did NOT ask Jones if he in fact deleted the emails and one of the other involved parties states that he indeed DID delete the emails(but apparently no one asked him) would that be sufficient cause for you to admit that M-R's inquiry was incompetent at best, and a whitewash at worst?

do you think it is reasonable that neither of the english inquiries took testimony from witnesses who were in any way adversarial to UEA? and that the papers studied and the members of the inquiries were chosen by UEA?

 

[Trakar]

As for Jones, no, his request, regardless of intent or circumstance, was ethically deficient at best. The fact, however that it was never acted upon by either party, as the evidence demonstrates, tells me that while an inappropriate comment, it was most likely no different than any of the huffing and puffing that is evident upon most messageboards and and text exchanges among millions of ordinary people everyday.

ahhh, we are getting somewhere. you agree that Jones was ethically deficient at best.

in that instance, that would be an appropriate qualification of my opinion of Jone's request.

what about the Muir Russell inquiry? if M-R states that he did NOT ask Jones if he in fact deleted the emails and one of the other involved parties states that he indeed DID delete the emails(but apparently no one asked him) would that be sufficient cause for you to admit that M-R's inquiry was incompetent at best, and a whitewash at worst?

If you can link and reference, reliable, verifiable, contextually complete information that supports your assertion, I would be happy to examine it and give you my opinion of issues information and the individuals involved.

do you think it is reasonable that neither of the english inquiries took testimony from witnesses who were in any way adversarial to UEA?

And you perceive this as relevent to the scope and nature of the investigations how?

and that the papers studied and the members of the inquiries were chosen by UEA?

Again how is this relevent to the purpose of these investigations? The UEA were the victims of a crime, they were not on trial as criminals.

The Independent Climate Change Email inquiry