CRU = the Tip of the Iceberg
 

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/...ut_the_ti.html

Oh oh....

CRU = the Tip of the Iceberg
 

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/...ut_the_ti.html

Oh oh....


Ah, the same guy who didn't want the California utilities to be able to
voluntarily adjust thermostats... a smear campaign expert!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_American_Thinker

--
Nom=de=Plume

CRU = the Tip of the Iceberg
 

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 18:29:02 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/...ut_the_ti.html

Oh oh....

" It seems that all of the Aloha State’s surviving stations reside in
major airports. Nonetheless, this unrepresentative hot data is what’s
used to 'infill' the surrounding 'empty' Grid Boxes up to 1200 km out
to sea. So in effect, you have "jet airport tarmacs ‘standing in’ for
temperature over water 1200 km closer to the North Pole."

What could possibly be wrong with that?

My gosh, pretty soon people are going to start learning the truth.

Thanks.
--

"Your honor can never be taken from you. Cherish it, in yourself and in others." (Unknown)

John H

CRU = the Tip of the Iceberg
 

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 19:41:13 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 18:29:02 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/...ut_the_ti.html

Oh oh....

" It seems that all of the Aloha State’s surviving stations reside in
major airports. Nonetheless, this unrepresentative hot data is what’s
used to 'infill' the surrounding 'empty' Grid Boxes up to 1200 km out
to sea. So in effect, you have "jet airport tarmacs ‘standing in’ for
temperature over water 1200 km closer to the North Pole."

What could possibly be wrong with that?

My gosh, pretty soon people are going to start learning the truth.

Thanks.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7000063.ece

CRU = the Tip of the Iceberg
 

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 15:39:01 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/...ut_the_ti.html

Oh oh....


Ah, the same guy who didn't want the California utilities to be able to
voluntarily adjust thermostats... a smear campaign expert!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_American_Thinker

"The new controversy also goes back to the IPCC's 2007 report in which
a separate section warned that the world had "suffered rapidly rising
costs due to extreme weather-related events since the 1970s".

It suggested a part of this increase was due to global warming and
cited the unpublished report, saying: "One study has found that while
the dominant signal remains that of the significant increases in the
values of exposure at risk, once losses are normalised for exposure,
there still remains an underlying rising trend."

The Sunday Times has since found that the scientific paper on which
the IPCC based its claim had not been peer reviewed, nor published, at
the time the climate body issued its report.

When the paper was eventually published, in 2008, it had a new caveat.
It said: "We find insufficient evidence to claim a statistical
relationship between global temperature increase and catastrophe
losses."


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7000063.ece

CRU = the Tip of the Iceberg
 

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 18:29:02 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/...ut_the_ti.html

Oh oh....

American Thinker? Why not Worldnet Daily?

CRU = the Tip of the Iceberg
 

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 21:25:52 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 19:41:13 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 18:29:02 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/...ut_the_ti.html

Oh oh....

" It seems that all of the Aloha State’s surviving stations reside in
major airports. Nonetheless, this unrepresentative hot data is what’s
used to 'infill' the surrounding 'empty' Grid Boxes up to 1200 km out
to sea. So in effect, you have "jet airport tarmacs ‘standing in’ for
temperature over water 1200 km closer to the North Pole."

What could possibly be wrong with that?

My gosh, pretty soon people are going to start learning the truth.

Thanks.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7000063.ece

So, the New York Times mentions none of that, but does mention that
the last decade was the warmest on record, using the mal-placed
thermometers of NASA.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/sc...ml?ref=science

I'm beginning to think the Global Warming conspiracy goes much further
than I'd previously imagined. If you look at the recent NYT articles
on the subject, it's apparent that they're purposely disregarding any
real conflicting opinions.

Whoops, with a little more searching I found this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/sc...ml?ref=science

and, buried in there somewhere was this single paragraph:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/21/sc...html?ref=earth

Surprisingly, I've seen nothing of this on any of the network news
programs.
--

"Your honor can never be taken from you. Cherish it, in yourself and in others." (Unknown)

John H

CRU = the Tip of the Iceberg
 

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 21:28:04 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 15:39:01 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/...ut_the_ti.html

Oh oh....


Ah, the same guy who didn't want the California utilities to be able to
voluntarily adjust thermostats... a smear campaign expert!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_American_Thinker

"The new controversy also goes back to the IPCC's 2007 report in which
a separate section warned that the world had "suffered rapidly rising
costs due to extreme weather-related events since the 1970s".

It suggested a part of this increase was due to global warming and
cited the unpublished report, saying: "One study has found that while
the dominant signal remains that of the significant increases in the
values of exposure at risk, once losses are normalised for exposure,
there still remains an underlying rising trend."

The Sunday Times has since found that the scientific paper on which
the IPCC based its claim had not been peer reviewed, nor published, at
the time the climate body issued its report.

When the paper was eventually published, in 2008, it had a new caveat.
It said: "We find insufficient evidence to claim a statistical
relationship between global temperature increase and catastrophe
losses."


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7000063.ece

Remember who you're dealing with, D'Plum is very good at inane
one-liners.

--

"Your honor can never be taken from you. Cherish it, in yourself and in others." (Unknown)

John H

CRU = the Tip of the Iceberg
 

John H wrote:

Remember who you're dealing with, D'Plum is very good at inane
one-liners.



While your specialty is just plain ignorance, lying, and stupidity about
issues.