As Hurricane Irene weakens and behaves exactly like any other hurricane of this size, the NYT has decided to bring up the old and silly argument that hurricanes are getting worse because of global warming. This is a really dead horse, but it appears that it must be dealt with each and every time a hurricane shows up.
You are currently browsing the Fear and Misinformation category.
This morning I came across an article that set off all kinds of warning alarms over on Forbes. It makes the astounding claim that renewable energy has surpassed nuclear power in the United States. I knew right away that there was some funny going on because nuclear has been a solid 20% of electric energy generation for a long time and things like that don’t change quickly.
The first indicator of how that claim came about was when she provided the percentage of power generated by nuclear power.
In the first three months of 2011, renewable energy — hydroelectric, geothermal, solar/PV, wind, and biomass — made up 11.7 percent of the U.S. energy production mix, surpassing nuclear at 11.1 percent.
Posted July 10th, 2011. Add a comment
There is a proposal by some nut-jobs to get in helicopters and fly around shooting camels in order to slow down global warming. Just think about that for a moment. The ‘thought’ behind that is it will reduce the methane emissions enough to… well who knows what they are thinking.
PARIS: The world’s association of camel scientists has fought back angrily over Australian plans to kill wild dromedaries on the grounds that their flatulence adds to global warming.
The idea is “false and stupid… a scientific aberration”, the International Society of Camelid Research and Development (ISOCARD) charged, saying camels were being made culprits for a man-made problem.
Posted July 7th, 2011. 7 comments
There has been a rash of news about how settled the global warming debate really is. From brand new ‘neutral’ discussions that have concluded within a matter of weeks that global warming is real to Geological Society taking a stand that the current situation could be comparable to previous events in the past that were associated with periods of warming.
I very disappointed by the statement put out by the Geological Society. They put together a very nice comprehensive history of the Earth’s climate which is pretty detailed and is very much in alignment with the history that I have put together, but they also make some assumptions that are really not supported. I think the committee that put this together really had a fight on their hands.
Posted June 27th, 2011. 2 comments
Ariel Schwartz writes some really out there articles about the climate, but I think she has gone a bit overboard. Her understanding of the science appears to be about as deep as knowing each and every possible catastrophy that has been projected as a result of global warming, but nothing any deeper than that.
I will tackle the list of dangers that she has listed and add some facts to it. Somehow I doubt that she will appreciate a proper peer review.
Posted June 22nd, 2011. 10 comments
There is a new paper involving the omnipresent Michael Mann that is going to get lots of attention. The paper isn’t even out yet, but already I am very intrigued because the data used in the charts is clearly not the data that it says it is. The graph in the paper shows significantly more warming that the data it claims to be. For a peer-reviewed document that should be the gold standard, this one is already seriously lacking at the first cursory review.
At first glance I saw something wrong with the top chart in this figure.
Posted June 20th, 2011. 10 comments
Geo-Engineering seems to be experiencing a resurgence. The IPCC once again seems to be behind the idea that intentionally interfering with the climate is the way to solve the theorized problem that increased CO2 levels cause. Since all of the ideas will be very expensive and be paid for by tax-payer money and be run by the scientists that propose them, they might seem like good ideas to the scientists that are proposing the idea.
The key quote from the latest article about the IPCC push for Geo-engineering really explains the whole situation.
Posted June 16th, 2011. 2 comments
It is now mid-June and there is panic starting to set in because of record amounts of snow that still cover much of the mountains in the western United States. Some places got as much as 20 additional inches of snow over Memorial Day weekend two weeks ago. In places that are normally long clear of snow at this time of year there is as much as 20 ft (6m) of snow.
The blame for this year has been on the La Nina from last winter and that certainly played a role in the amount of precipitation that feel in the mountains. What is abnormal even for a La Nina year is the simple fact that the snow is not melting. It is June and the snow is still deep in many places throughout the western US. So saying that a moderate La Nina is the cause when a stronger La Nina happened a few years ago, but without the lack of melting is a stretch.
Posted June 13th, 2011. 6 comments
Truly a fascinating new development is taking place from the Dr. Jones of the CRU. The claim is now out there that global warming is statistically significant once 2010 is taken into account. The claim is based on the fact that with 2009 in the mix, the statistical certainty was only 90%, but now that 2010 is added, the 95% threshold for significance has (finally) been achieved. I have to be honest, it made me laugh.
The data is based on the HadCRUT3 temperature data from 1995-2010. That 15 year period is now the basis for the claim that global warming is real and fully upon us. The basis for this seems to be that the 15 year average is now high enough to be statistically different from the period before it. I could find a number of ways to torture the data to show that, but really it is amusing considering what the climate has been doing for the past 10 of those 15 years.
Posted June 10th, 2011. 3 comments
I have had numerous people send me articles about Google and their search results about Global Warming. Other blogs have picked up on this and the overall discussion from the skeptic side is that Google has failed in their maxim of “Do No Evil.” I happen to disagree with this.
First off Google is public business and as such is almost required to stick to the idea that global warming is real. Find me a public company that takes the official stance that global warming isn’t real. I have not been able to find one. So I don’t really care that Google takes the stance about global warming that it does. Public companies must show environmental responsibility these days. As an engineer I fully understand the legal and public relations responsibility in that regard.