• Home
  • Youth
  • About MECA
  • Member Coops
  • Event Calendar
  • Energy Plan for America
  • Kids Corner
  • Links
Untitled document
  • Home
  • News
  • Education
  • Member Login
  • Safety Login
  • Contact Us
  • Photo Gallery
  • Reader Gallery
: 

Untitled document

Photo of the Day Sept. 8

Will Climategate kill alarmism?

We present these news items to broaden the discussion on cooperative energy issues. An informed consumer is an informed voter.

Untitled document

Sep 7, 2010
Icecap Alarmism Halved
Untitled document New study shows icecap loss estimates are wrong by a factor of two. (If you see this story in your daily newspaper, please give a heads up to rural@mtco-ops.com )
[More]
Sep 7, 2010
Fatal Copper Theft Attempt
Untitled document Suspected Thief Electrocuted
[More]
Aug 13, 2010
Answer: Consumers
Untitled document Question: Who pays the price for government enforced switch to green energy, usually couched in terms like 20 percent of 1990 levels by 2020? Japanese, Spanish and the Germans know the answer.
[More]
Aug 10, 2010
Fair and balanced? We'll see.
Untitled document Temps below average in Southern Cal (You've been reading news about the hottest summer on the planet in the planet's history. Which may well be true. But have you seen this story in your newspaper? If so, let us know which paper in Montana portrayed it. E-mail rural@mtco-ops.com And thanks for revealing the balanced coverage in the press.) 
[More]
Jul 28, 2010
When Science gets bossy
Untitled document "If science wants to redeem itself and regain its place with the public’s affection, scientists need to come out every time some politician says, “The science says we must…” and reply, “Science only tells us what is. It does not, and can never tell us what we should or must do.” "
[More]
Jul 26, 2010
Warming alarmism dead?
Untitled document ". . . the investigations will be among the final nails in the coffin for the global warming alarmist movement . . .

Most likely, this was the tipping point. Global warming zealots have lost. It's only a matter of time until they realize it and move on to a new contrived catastrophe, where doubtless they'll be warmly received by a compliant press and amply rewarded with more tax-subsidized grants. It seems there are insatiable appetites and never-ending tax dollars for the proper causes." --Orange County Register

[More]
Jul 22, 2010
Cap'n Tax is Dead
Untitled document For now. Will it be ba-a-a-a-aahck?
[More]
Jul 12, 2010
Climategate Reviews Reviewed
Untitled document

Any doubt why two universities cleared its Climategate scientists? "Readers of both earlier reports need to know that both institutions receive tens of millions in federal global warming research funding."

Wonder why thenews is all alarmist? "Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama, Huntsville, has noted that it's becoming nearly impossible to publish anything on global warming that's nonalarmist in peer-reviewed journals." Because of pressure unveiled in the Climategate emails.

Curious as to why the latest panel exonerated the CRU scientists? "That's because they only interviewed CRU people, not the people whom they had trashed."

[More]
Jul 9, 2010
Climategate Report Stories (2)
Untitled document Vindication or Whitewash? Don't rely on the headlines. Read the full stories before you decide.
[More]
Jul 8, 2010
Down with Doom
Untitled document

From the unlikeliest of sources: "On what principle is it that, when we see nothing but improvement behind us, we are to expect nothing but deterioration before us."

Just saying is all.

[More]
Jul 6, 2010
Climategate and the Climate Wars
Untitled document Climategate a "Game Changer." Critics say the emails reveal evasion of freedom of information law, secret deals done during the writing of reports for the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a cover-up of uncertainties in key research findings and the misuse of scientific peer review to silence critics.
[More]
Jun 25, 2010
Climate Panel gets new faces
Untitled document Concerns with the IPCC reports have "far less to do with the individuals involved than a deeply flawed process." Flaws include reports of Himalayan glacier melts based on wild claims rather than science.
[More]
May 21, 2010
Green in Spain = "Disaster"
Untitled document

"Spain admits that the green energy as sold to Obama is a disaster"

That headline is from a Spanish newspaper, folks, not Fox News, not the editor of RM. Report: "admits the ominous economic consequences of betting in favor of renewable energies"

Excerpt:

"The owners of solar plants make 12 times more than what they pay for the energy coming from fossil fuel combustion. The majority are subsidies charged to the consumer.

The conclusion is that with the economy at the point of bankruptcy, it is not possible to keep injecting money in such a costly sector. And the government seems to realize this now."

[More]
May 13, 2010
Cash for Caulkers
Untitled document

Home Star bill moves through US House

[More]
May 10, 2010
The China Rules on GW
Untitled document "Even as China has set ambitious goals for itself in clean-energy production and reduction of global warming gases, the country’s surging demand for power from oil and coal has led to the largest six-month increase in the tonnage of human generated greenhouse gases ever by a single country. "
[More]

Home
Jan 17, 2010
Print
Return

Bogus GW Glacier Story


Untitled document

World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown

A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.

Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.

In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC's 2007 report.

It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.

Related Internet Links

  • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report on Himalayan glaciers
  • How New Scientist reported the row

Related Links

  • Global warming blamed for rise in malaria
  • Experts clash over sea-rise ‘apocalypse’

Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was "speculation" and was not supported by any formal research. aProfessor Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on glaciers in the IPCC report, said he would recommend that the claim about glaciers be dropped: "If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, than I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments."

The IPCC's reliance on Hasnain's 1999 interview has been highlighted by Fred Pearce, the journalist who carried out the original interview for the New Scientist. Pearce said he rang Hasnain in India in 1999 after spotting his claims in an Indian magazine. Pearce said: "Hasnain told me then that he was bringing a report containing those numbers to Britain. The report had not been peer reviewed or formally published in a scientific journal and it had no formal status so I reported his work on that basis.

"Since then I have obtained a copy and it does not say what Hasnain said. In other words it does not mention 2035 as a date by which any Himalayan glaciers will melt. However, he did make clear that his comments related only to part of the Himalayan glaciers. not the whole massif."

The New Scientist report was apparently forgotten until 2005 when WWF cited it in a report called An Overview of Glaciers, Glacier Retreat, and Subsequent Impacts in Nepal, India and China. The report credited Hasnain's 1999 interview with the New Scientist. But it was a campaigning report rather than an academic paper so it was not subjected to any formal scientific review. Despite this it rapidly became a key source for the IPCC when Lal and his colleagues came to write the section on the Himalayas.

When finally published, the IPCC report did give its source as the WWF study but went further, suggesting the likelihood of the glaciers melting was "very high". The IPCC defines this as having a probability of greater than 90%.

The report read: "Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate."

However, glaciologists find such figures inherently ludicrous, pointing out that most Himalayan glaciers are hundreds of feet thick and could not melt fast enough to vanish by 2035 unless there was a huge global temperature rise. The maximum rate of decline in thickness seen in glaciers at the moment is 2-3 feet a year and most are far lower.

UK Times online link for more of the story here

UK Times online link here

 


Untitled document
  Thursday, September 09, 2010   
Copyright©MECA 2009 | Telephone: 406.761.8333 | FAX: 406.761.8339 | P.O. Box 1306 | Great Falls, MT 59403