More inconvenient data
The real deal in terms of political uncertainty -- the inconvenient elephant in the room -- involves Hillary and Al Gore (hereafter "Algore"). You see if Hillary is deemed to become vulnerable, then there is realistically only one "contendah." Even though Algore was defeated, no matter what the liberal weenies say (the margin was found to be bigger in the recount, and when the mail-ins were finally tallied, it was not even close ... so stick that in your collective pipe), he is rehabilitated by the the film "An Inconvenient Truth." Of course, why a pack of lies and untruths can rehabilitate someone is beyond me. Must be something about being liberal.
So this places Hillary in an inconvenient place. Algore is not readily attackable, at least not within the orthodox DNC / liberal movement. He has ascended to elder statesman, adopted his mantle of gray and issues statements of wisdom. He even has a Nobel Prize. Hillary has ... a history of flip-flops, ultra-liberal positions, a legacy of salted Earth tactics. And she is singularly unlikeable.
But Algore's support is almost entirely based on the perception that he is our evironmental savior.... What if someone, say Hillary, were to debunk it. You see, when you disassemble the global warming movement, Algore's positions and statements start to seem absurd. So totally out-of-touch that his support might suddenly vanish for fear of being tarred with the same brush. But then Hillary might have handed the election to the Republicans and the right wing loonies that want their hummers and Jesus to drive them. Difficult position, then. But how might she do it?
Let's look at the hard truths behind the inconvenience of it all. In the 1970's, the common wisdom among scientists was that the Earth was cooling, and rapidly at that. The fear was real that the Earth was about to enter a new Ice Age. Sociologically, this had bad juju written all over it: the great periods of warming were the times of the strongest growth of civilization ... the Roman Warming, the Medieval Warming (start of the Renaissance) and the Industrial Revolution . The Dark Ages was a cooling period, as was the Little Ice Age -- and things were not exactly groovy.... The hotest period, however, was about 8000 years ago -- with a gradual cooling until the Roman Warming.
In the 1980's, thanks to the readings commissioned by an oceanographer named Roger Revelle, some scientists noted that the carbon dioxide levels were increasing, as was temperature on a global basis. The imaginative put two and two together and Viola! CO2 was responsible for the increases in global temperatures -- it rapidly became the orthodox, as it means that man, the evil little wanker, was responsible. And in particular, the greedy little capitalist vermin and their willing co-conspirators, the American consumer. Politically sound. Definitely a boost for the anti-globalization crowd.
Then in 1988, a Senator from some hotbed of wisdom (uh, was that state?), held hearings in Washington on the topic. He had earlier been a student of the eminent Dr. Revelle. His name was Algore. At the same time, those supporters of knowledge and honesty known as the United Nations launched the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the "IPCC"). This group commissioned 1500 "experts" to investigate and report -- but in the light of a preface called the Summary for Policymakers, which was drafted by governments and official -- but not the actual scientists. In the process, the exemptions, doubts, ring-fencing, caveats outlined by the scientists were omitted from the part that anyone actually read. It was a political statement, and not a scientific analysis. Had it been submitted to Federal Court, it would have been thrown out as inadmissible for failure to pass the test required of expert evidence. Nonetheless, the first report published in 1991 was not wholly on the bandwagon of CO2 mania. The second report of 1996 featured the thesis by obscure U.S. scientists that CO2 was the culprit, but notwithstanding the heavy criticism by the leading climatologists as to approach and data manipulation, it was embraced as complete scientific consensus on the matter. Not coincidentally, the Summary for Policy Makers of the 1996 report had Algore's fingerprints all over it. So too did the attempt to push the Kyoto BS through the Senate. Algore failed in that particular gerrymandering of evidence and commonsense.
Right before his death, Dr. Revelle tried to draw attention to an article he had written basically throwing some water on the raging CO2 thesis. Algore, mush to his discredit, tried to bury that article, as damaging as it was that his guru might have second thoughts ... or at least some intellectual honesty -- unlike his pupil.
The next milestone in the Global Warming saga was the infamous "hockey stick" graph. This has now been debunked by everyone with more than high school level statistical training. The algorithm used created the same shape almost no matter what data was used. The IPCC (read UN morons) took this graph as the grail of truth on the matter: in the 2001 Third Report, this was the page one, exhibit one. Headlines. Proof of the evil of man. But using the algorithm, the Little Ice Age didn't happen. The Dark Age cooling wasn't. The Medieval Warming a straight line. When the jiggery-pokey was removed, lo and behold ... the Middle Ages was warmer than today. Hmmm.... Something was not right. But the EU bought it hook line and sinker.
The EU believe that Algore is telling the truth when he claims that by 2100 the sea level will rise 20 feet. Florida will be submerged. England, awash. The Netherlands -- gone. But Algore was careless: even the IPCC predicted a worst case senario of 5-15 inches rise. 20 feet? Hyperbole or careless and ignorant? Heedless of truth? And the growth in CO2 ... who really cares about Kyoto when China will pass the US next year as will India shortly after that in CO2 emissions. And they are exempt to all intents and purposes from any attempt to reign in their emissions. So it simply does not matter what Europe or the US does, no matter who is right -- but it certainly makes any hoo-haa over Kyoto silly in the extreme.
Now Hillary, listen up ... here is the killer ap: James Hansen (of the Goddard Institute) and Algore's closest ally in the Global Warming conspiracy, has been obliged to revise his doomsday graphs and correct the data. KNOW NOW that the hottest year of the 20th Century was not 1998, but 1934. Four of the warmest years in the top ten of the past century were in the 1930's. That is inconvenient. Also inconvenient is that most credible evidence shows that since 1998 the Earth has not been getting warmer and in fact may have been starting to cool.
Sun surface activity follows cycles too. And the last 100 years have been active, but evidence shows that this activity is slowing. The correlation of sun surface activity to temperature is strong, without any voodoo hockey stick graphs. Back to the 1970's anyone?
Hillary, a word of reason from you might hedge you Algore exposure -- but it is a dangerous game to play. There are too many out there who fervently believe -- and most of them are on your side of the aisle in Congress.
So this places Hillary in an inconvenient place. Algore is not readily attackable, at least not within the orthodox DNC / liberal movement. He has ascended to elder statesman, adopted his mantle of gray and issues statements of wisdom. He even has a Nobel Prize. Hillary has ... a history of flip-flops, ultra-liberal positions, a legacy of salted Earth tactics. And she is singularly unlikeable.
But Algore's support is almost entirely based on the perception that he is our evironmental savior.... What if someone, say Hillary, were to debunk it. You see, when you disassemble the global warming movement, Algore's positions and statements start to seem absurd. So totally out-of-touch that his support might suddenly vanish for fear of being tarred with the same brush. But then Hillary might have handed the election to the Republicans and the right wing loonies that want their hummers and Jesus to drive them. Difficult position, then. But how might she do it?
Let's look at the hard truths behind the inconvenience of it all. In the 1970's, the common wisdom among scientists was that the Earth was cooling, and rapidly at that. The fear was real that the Earth was about to enter a new Ice Age. Sociologically, this had bad juju written all over it: the great periods of warming were the times of the strongest growth of civilization ... the Roman Warming, the Medieval Warming (start of the Renaissance) and the Industrial Revolution . The Dark Ages was a cooling period, as was the Little Ice Age -- and things were not exactly groovy.... The hotest period, however, was about 8000 years ago -- with a gradual cooling until the Roman Warming.
In the 1980's, thanks to the readings commissioned by an oceanographer named Roger Revelle, some scientists noted that the carbon dioxide levels were increasing, as was temperature on a global basis. The imaginative put two and two together and Viola! CO2 was responsible for the increases in global temperatures -- it rapidly became the orthodox, as it means that man, the evil little wanker, was responsible. And in particular, the greedy little capitalist vermin and their willing co-conspirators, the American consumer. Politically sound. Definitely a boost for the anti-globalization crowd.
Then in 1988, a Senator from some hotbed of wisdom (uh, was that state?), held hearings in Washington on the topic. He had earlier been a student of the eminent Dr. Revelle. His name was Algore. At the same time, those supporters of knowledge and honesty known as the United Nations launched the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the "IPCC"). This group commissioned 1500 "experts" to investigate and report -- but in the light of a preface called the Summary for Policymakers, which was drafted by governments and official -- but not the actual scientists. In the process, the exemptions, doubts, ring-fencing, caveats outlined by the scientists were omitted from the part that anyone actually read. It was a political statement, and not a scientific analysis. Had it been submitted to Federal Court, it would have been thrown out as inadmissible for failure to pass the test required of expert evidence. Nonetheless, the first report published in 1991 was not wholly on the bandwagon of CO2 mania. The second report of 1996 featured the thesis by obscure U.S. scientists that CO2 was the culprit, but notwithstanding the heavy criticism by the leading climatologists as to approach and data manipulation, it was embraced as complete scientific consensus on the matter. Not coincidentally, the Summary for Policy Makers of the 1996 report had Algore's fingerprints all over it. So too did the attempt to push the Kyoto BS through the Senate. Algore failed in that particular gerrymandering of evidence and commonsense.
Right before his death, Dr. Revelle tried to draw attention to an article he had written basically throwing some water on the raging CO2 thesis. Algore, mush to his discredit, tried to bury that article, as damaging as it was that his guru might have second thoughts ... or at least some intellectual honesty -- unlike his pupil.
The next milestone in the Global Warming saga was the infamous "hockey stick" graph. This has now been debunked by everyone with more than high school level statistical training. The algorithm used created the same shape almost no matter what data was used. The IPCC (read UN morons) took this graph as the grail of truth on the matter: in the 2001 Third Report, this was the page one, exhibit one. Headlines. Proof of the evil of man. But using the algorithm, the Little Ice Age didn't happen. The Dark Age cooling wasn't. The Medieval Warming a straight line. When the jiggery-pokey was removed, lo and behold ... the Middle Ages was warmer than today. Hmmm.... Something was not right. But the EU bought it hook line and sinker.
The EU believe that Algore is telling the truth when he claims that by 2100 the sea level will rise 20 feet. Florida will be submerged. England, awash. The Netherlands -- gone. But Algore was careless: even the IPCC predicted a worst case senario of 5-15 inches rise. 20 feet? Hyperbole or careless and ignorant? Heedless of truth? And the growth in CO2 ... who really cares about Kyoto when China will pass the US next year as will India shortly after that in CO2 emissions. And they are exempt to all intents and purposes from any attempt to reign in their emissions. So it simply does not matter what Europe or the US does, no matter who is right -- but it certainly makes any hoo-haa over Kyoto silly in the extreme.
Now Hillary, listen up ... here is the killer ap: James Hansen (of the Goddard Institute) and Algore's closest ally in the Global Warming conspiracy, has been obliged to revise his doomsday graphs and correct the data. KNOW NOW that the hottest year of the 20th Century was not 1998, but 1934. Four of the warmest years in the top ten of the past century were in the 1930's. That is inconvenient. Also inconvenient is that most credible evidence shows that since 1998 the Earth has not been getting warmer and in fact may have been starting to cool.
Sun surface activity follows cycles too. And the last 100 years have been active, but evidence shows that this activity is slowing. The correlation of sun surface activity to temperature is strong, without any voodoo hockey stick graphs. Back to the 1970's anyone?
Hillary, a word of reason from you might hedge you Algore exposure -- but it is a dangerous game to play. There are too many out there who fervently believe -- and most of them are on your side of the aisle in Congress.
posted by Zaphod at Sunday, November 04, 2007
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home