Posts Tagged ‘New York’

Part 4: Recent 9 Months U.S. Regional Temperature trend/decade – It is getting cooler and cooler

9 november, 2011

And the cooling continues. Even on a regional level. Sorry – I mean that Global Warming is an imminent treat to humankind everywhere. Move on, NOTHING to see here.

Here is the last part of my regional analysis of the recent 9 months (year to date, January-September) US temperature from a regional perspective.

I wanted to see how the national trend is, or is not, mimicked in the 9 US climate regions. And how these regional decade trends have evolved during the last 111 years.

Especially to see how the decade trends have evolved during the last 41 years. The period that according to the Global Warming Hysterics and computer models they worship should show a steady and accelerated increase in temperature.

I don’t know about you, but I consider a 9 month consecutive month trend 111 years long to be a “quit good” indicator.

And since the October temperature data are just out today I will do a quick comparison between the 10 months (year to date, January-October) data and compare it with the 9 months data.

Part 1 here:

Part 1: Recent 9 Months U.S. Regional Temperature trend/decade – It is getting cooler and cooler

Part 2 here:

Part 2: Recent 9 Months U.S. Regional Temperature trend/decade – It is getting cooler and cooler

Part 3 here:

Part 3: Recent 9 Months U.S. Regional Temperature trend/decade – It is getting cooler and cooler

And as I always point out:

Remember, these are the official figures. With the poor placement of stations (91 % of the stations are CRN 3 to 5 = bad to very poor); where they have purposely taken away the urban heat island effect, use huge smoothing radius, the historical “adjustment and tweaking” to cool the past etc.

Not to mention the great slaughter of GHCN stations 1990-1993 – roughly 63 % of all stations were “dropped”. Oddly enough many of them in cold places – Hmmm? Now the number of GHCN stations is back at the same numbers as in 1890.

Also remember that the US stations are now nearly a third of the all GHCN world stations.

So to summarize this evidence of this US regional “accelerated warming” trend:

                               North West (WA, OR and ID)

The recent 9 months (Jan-Sep) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.11 F / Decade

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is 1.39 F / Decade

                                        West (CA and NV)

The recent 9 months (Jan-Sep) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.16 F / Decade

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is – 1.38 F / Decade

                    West North Central (MT, NE, ND, SD and WY)

The recent 9 months (Jan-Sep) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.19 F / Decade

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is – 2.08 F / Decade

                           Southwest (AZ, CO, NM and UT)

The recent 9 months (Jan-Sep) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.18 F / Decade

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is 1.84 F / Decade

South (AR, LA, KS, MS, OK and TX)

The recent 9 months (Jan-Sep) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.01 F / Decade

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is – 0.19 F / Decade

East North Central (IA, MI, MN and WI)

The recent 9 months (Jan-Sep) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.11 F / Decade

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is – 1.05 F / Decade

                     Central (IL, IN, KY, MO, OH, TN and WV)

The recent 9 months (Jan-Sep) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.02 F / Decade

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is – 0.33 F / Decade

Southeast (AL, FL, GA, NC, SC and VA)

The recent 9 months (Jan-Sep) trend for 1900 to 2011 is – 0.03 F / Decade

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is 0.26 F / Decade

Northeast (CR, DE, ME, MD, MA, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI and VT)

The recent 9 months (Jan-Sep) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.09 F / Decade

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is 0.83 F / Decade

And as I said in the beginningalways remember that these figures are based on the official data that has been tweaked, “adjusted” and manipulated to fit their agenda (cool the past, ignore UHI and land use change factors, huge smoothing radius – 1200km etc.)..

Do you notice the “accelerated warming” trend from 1970-2011 to 2000-2011??

And this is also the decade that the Global Warming Hysterics have been screaming at the top of their lungs, trying to scare us to death, about the catastrophic treat that the “extreme increase” in temperature is to mankind and earth.

As I said in the beginning the temperature data for October is just out today so I thought it would be really interesting to compare the new 10 month consecutive month trend for 111 years to the 9 month data in my posts.

So here is a quick comparison for the Trend/Decade for 1900-2011 (and this time I spare you all the graphs OK):

                             North West (WA, OR and ID)

The recent 10 months (Jan-Oct) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.11 F / Decade

The difference to the 9 months data is – 0.02 F COOLER

                                      West (CA and NV)

The recent 10 months (Jan-Oct) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.16 F / Decade

The difference to the 9 months data is none, it is the same.

               West North Central (MT, NE, ND, SD and WY)

The recent 10 months (Jan-Oct) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.17 F / Decade

The difference to the 9 months data is – 0.02 F COOLER

                         Southwest (AZ, CO, NM and UT)

The recent 10 months (Jan-Oct) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.17 F / Decade

The difference to the 9 months data is – 0.01 F COOLER

                         South (AR, LA, KS, MS, OK and TX)

The recent 10 months (Jan-Oct) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.01 F / Decade

The difference to the 9 months data is none, it is the same.

                    East North Central (IA, MI, MN and WI)

The recent 10 months (Jan-Oct) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.09 F / Decade

The difference to the 9 months data is – 0.02 F COOLER

                    Central (IL, IN, KY, MO, OH, TN and WV)

The recent 10 months (Jan-Oct) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.00 F / Decade

The difference to the 9 months data is – 0.02 F COOLER

                        Southeast (AL, FL, GA, NC, SC and VA)

The recent 10 months (Jan-Oct) trend for 1900 to 2011 is – 0.04 F / Decade

The difference to the 9 months data is 0.01 F COOLER

   Northeast (CR, DE, ME, MD, MA, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI and VT)

The recent 10 months (Jan-Oct) trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.07 F / Decade

The difference to the 9 months data is – 0.02 F COOLER

And remember that this is the whole 10 month consecutive temperature Trend/ Decade for 111 years.

I don’t know about you, but I consider this 10 month consecutive month trend 111 years long to be a “quit good” indicator.

And what was the difference between the 9 and 10 month Trend/Decade?

In 7 regions the COOLING increased and in 2 they stayed the same.

According to the computer models that the Global Warming Hysterics love so much, worship and blindly follows (especially our intelligent politicians), it should be EXACTLY the opposite.

And we are supposed to be very worried about a predicted rise of 3-4 F in 100 years?

But not this ACTUAL trend?

And for this predicted trend the politicians want to take our societies back to the Stone Age. But, as usual, they DO NOTHING about the actual trend.

And remember that there where two regions that had some warming during 2000-2011 (SE and NE). And that in reality it was a few states that were behind this warming in each region?

So I could not help myself but to include the new data for 2000-2011 (and I could not resist the graphs either):

                    Southeast (AL, FL, GA, NC, SC and VA)

The recent 10 months (Jan-Oct) trend for 2000 to 2011 is 0.15 F / Decade

The difference to the 9 months data is – 0.11 F COOLER

   Northeast (CR, DE, ME, MD, MA, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI and VT)

The recent 10 months (Jan-Oct) trend for 2000 to 2011 is 0.80 F / Decade

The difference to the 9 months data is – 0.03 F COOLER

So the only two regions that had some warming during 2000-2011 are COOLING too.

So the “warming” trend is really accelerating wouldn’t you say.

Some more “rapid warming” like this and the freezer looks really comfortable and warm.

Another brilliant and glorious example of RAPID WARMING and an eminent treat to humankind! Especially during the last 41 years.

That is truly “Global Warming” on a regional US style.

An interesting ”science” wouldn’t you say.

This is the “stuff” that “Global Warming” is made of.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

Annonser

Part 3: Recent 9 Months U.S. Regional Temperature trend/decade – It is getting cooler and cooler

8 november, 2011

And the cooling continues. Even on a regional level. Sorry – I mean that Global Warming is an imminent treat to humankind everywhere. Move on, NOTHING to see here.

Here is the third  part of my regional analysis of the recent 9 months (year to date, January-September) US temperature from a regional perspective.

To see how the national trend is, or is not, mimicked in the 9 US climate regions. And how these regional decade trends have evolved during the last 111 years.

Especially to see how the decade trends have evolved during the last 41 years. The period that according to the Global Warming Hysterics and computer models they worship should show a steady and accelerated increase in temperature.

Part 1 here:

Part 1: Recent 9 Months U.S. Regional Temperature trend/decade – It is getting cooler and cooler

Part 2 here:

Part 2: Recent 9 Months U.S. Regional Temperature trend/decade – It is getting cooler and cooler

And as I always point out:

Remember, these are the official figures. With the poor placement of stations (91 % of the stations are CRN 3 to 5 = bad to very poor); where they have purposely taken away the urban heat island effect, use huge smoothing radius, the historical “adjustment and tweaking” to cool the past etc.

Not to mention the great slaughter of GHCN stations 1990-1993 – roughly 63 % of all stations were “dropped”. Oddly enough many of them in cold places – Hmmm? Now the number of GHCN stations is back at the same numbers as in 1890.

Also remember that theUSstations are now nearly a third of the all GHCN world stations.

So here are the trends for the third and last three regions:

                     Central (IL, IN, KY, MO, OH, TN and WV)

Central temperature recent 9 months (Jan-Sep) 1900-2011

The trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.02 F / Decade

Central temperature recent 9 months (Jan- Sep) 1970-2011

The trend for 1970 to 2011 is 0.40 F / Decade

Central temperature recent 9 months (Jan- Sep) 1980-2011

The trend for 1980 to 2011 is 0.36 F / Decade

Central temperature recent 9 months (Jan- Sep) 1990-2011

The trend for 1990 to 2011 is 0.16 F / Decade

Central temperature recent 9 months (Jan- Sep) 2000-2011

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is – 0.33 F / Decade

                  Southeast (AL, FL, GA, NC, SC and VA)

Southeast temperature recent 9 months (Jan-Sep) 1900-2011

The trend for 1900 to 2011 is – 0.03 F / Decade

Southeast temperature recent 9 months (Jan- Sep) 1970-2011

The trend for 1970 to 2011 is 0.32 F / Decade

Southeast temperature recent 9 months (Jan- Sep) 1980-2011

The trend for 1980 to 2011 is 0.35 F / Decade

Southeast temperature recent 9 months (Jan- Sep) 1990-2011

The trend for 1990 to 2011 is – 0.03 F / Decade

Southeast temperature recent 9 months (Jan- Sep) 2000-2011

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is 0.26 F / Decade

    Northeast (CR, DE, ME, MD, MA, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI and VT)

Northeast temperature recent 9 months (Jan-Sep) 1900-2011

The trend for 1900 to 2011 is 0.09 F / Decade

Northeast temperature recent 9 months (Jan- Sep) 1970-2011

The trend for 1970 to 2011 is 0.41 F / Decade

Northeast temperature recent 9 months (Jan- Sep) 1980-2011

The trend for 1980 to 2011 is 0.43 F / Decade

Northeast temperature recent 9 months (Jan- Sep) 1990-2011

The trend for 1990 to 2011 is 0.39 F / Decade

Northeast temperature recent 9 months (Jan- Sep) 2000-2011

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is 0.83 F / Decade

And as I said in the beginningalways remember that these figures are based on the official data that has been tweaked, “adjusted” and manipulated to fit their agenda (cool the past, ignore UHI and land use change factors, huge smoothing radius – 1200km etc.).

As you can see this is a more mixed result, some cooling and some warming.

If we look at the 6 states in the Southeast region, it is only Virginia and to some part South Carolina that drives this value for the whole region. Florida for example has – 0.19 F trend/decade for the same period (2000-2011). And interestingly the trend for the last 111 years (1900 to 2011) is 0.03 F / Decade for the whole region.

Also notice the swings between decades: 1980 to 2011 is 0.35 F, 1990 to 2011 is – 0.03 F and 2000 to 2011 is 0.26 F.

And if we look at the 9 states in the Northeast region it is in reality only four states that drive that temperature for the whole region – ME, DE, NJ and VT. For example New Hampshire, between Maine and Vermont does not have even half the value of the neighboring states.

Remember that NOAA /NCDC determined these 9 climate regions because they are:

“nine climatically consistent regions within the contiguous United States”.

There is not supposed to be wild swings and huge differencies in temperature trend/decade just because you pass to the neighbouring state a few a miles away. We are not talking about diffrence in temperatur over the day or week here, but temperature trend/decade within miles of each other.

Another reason to be “confident” in the “sience” behind the Global Warmin Hysteria wouldn’t you say?

But it is an interesting observation none the less.

And these states are geographically very small so I suspect that these huge differences within the same region (and between neighboring states) has more to do with the placement of stations, the urban heat island effect etc.

So the “warming trend” 2000-2011 is exactly – 0.33 F, 0.26 F and 0.83 F degrees COOLER and warmer a decade for these 3 regions.  That is a – 3.3 F, 2.6 F and 8.3 F COOLER and warmer in 100 years.

And this is also the decade that the Global Warming Hysterics have been screaming at the top of their lungs, trying to scare us to death, about the catastrophic treat that the “extreme increase” in temperature is to mankind and earth.

According to the computer models that the Global Warming Hysterics love so much, worship and blindly follows (especially our intelligent politicians), it should be EXACTLY the opposite.

So to summarize this evidence of this “accelerated warming” trend:

The Central recent 9 months trend 2000 -2011 is exactly – 0.33 F degrees a decade.

The Southeast recent 9 months trend 2000 -2011 is exactly 0.26 F degrees a decade.

The Northeast recent 9 months trend 2000-2011 is exactly 0.83 F degrees a decade.

So the “warming” trend is really accelerating wouldn’t you say.

Some more “rapid warming” like this and the freezer looks really comfortable and warm.

Another brilliant and glorious example of RAPID WARMING and an eminent treat to humankind! Especially during the last 41 years.

That is truly “Global Warming” on a regional US style.

An interesting ”science” wouldn’t you say.

This is the “stuff” that “Global Warming” is made of.

Tomorrow the last part.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

Temperature Trend/Decade for the 4 Largest U.S. Cities – It is getting Cooler and Cooler

12 april, 2011

I have written before on the largest states and on regional temperature trends. So therefore I thought it would be interesting to look at the recent 3 months (January-March) temperature from a “historic” perspective for the 4 largest cities.

New York (8,175,133), Los Angeles (3,792,621), Chicago (2,695,598) and Houston (2,099,451). All population figures from the 2010 census.

Especially to see how the decade trends have evolved during the last 31 years. The period that according to the Global Warming Hysterics and computer models they worship should show a steady and accelerated increase in temperature.

These four cities also are very well geographically spread over the country which means the data is even more interesting.

And as I always point out:

Remember, these are the official figures. With the poor placement of stations (91 % of the stations are CRN 3 to 5 = bad to very poor); where they have purposely taken away the urban heat island effect, use huge smoothing radius, the historical “adjustment and tweaking” to cool the past etc.

Not to mention the great slaughter of GHCN stations 1990-1993 – roughly 63 % of all stations were “dropped”. Oddly enough many of them in cold places – Hmmm? Now the number of GHCN stations is back at the same numbers as in 1890.

Also remember that the US stations are now nearly a third of the all GHCN world stations.

Another point to remember is that these data are from big cities. This means big Urban Heat island effect. The very obvious effect that it is warmer in the middle of big cities compared to the suburbs. And even more so compared to the countryside outside city limits.

This UHI effect on official temperature data has always been denied by the Global Warming Hysterics. And they have done their best to “adjust”, “tweak” or “reconstruct” the data to hide that effect. So that it doesn’t need to be accounted for in the “official data”.

So keep that in mind when you see the data below. This is the warmest of the warmest – temperature data from inside big cities.

I have written extensively about the UHI effect, see for example my posts:

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 60

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 222

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 223

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 243

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 268

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 269

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 342

Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 354

How the world temperature “record” was manipulated through HUGE smoothing radius

How the world temperature “record” was manipulated through dropping of stations

Here is a good picture shoving the UHI effect

And here is a picture of an actual measurement in Reno, NV October 28, 2008. Shoving the Urban Heat island effect very clearly.

And remember this effect does not exist according to the Global Warming Hysterics. And does not in ANY SHAPE OR FORM affect the “official” temperature “records” according to them.

So here are the trends:

New York temperature recent 3 months (Jan-Mar) 1980-2011

The trend for 1980 to 2011 is 0.73 F / Decade

New York temperature recent 3 months (Jan-Mar) 1990-2011

The trend for 1990 to 2011 is – 0.30 F / Decade

New York temperature recent 3 months (Jan-Mar) 2000-2011

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is – 0.72 F / Decade

Wouldn’t you say that this is a prime example of rapid warming? Urban Heat island effect and all?

Los Angeles temperature recent 3 months (Jan-Mar) 1980-2011

The trend for 1980 to 2011 is – 0.27 F / Decade

Los Angeles temperature recent 3 months (Jan-Mar) 1990-2011

The trend for 1990 to 2011 is – 0.15 F / Decade

Los Angeles temperature recent 3 months (Jan-Mar) 2000-2011

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is  0.35 F / Decade

Some warming here. Interestingly the trend for the entire period (1944 to 2011) is0.51 F / Decade

Chicago temperature recent 3 months (Jan-Mar) 1980-2011

The trend for 1980 to 2011 is 0.63 F / Decade

Chicago temperature recent 3 months (Jan-Mar) 1990-2011

The trend for 1990 to 2011 is – 1.50 F / Decade

Chicago temperature recent 3 months (Jan-Mar) 2000-2011

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is – 2.97 F / Decade

So the “warming trend” 2000-2011 is exactly 2.97 F degrees COOLER a decade.  That is a whopping – 29.7 F COOLER in 100 years. Warm yourself!

Wouldn’t you say that this is a prime example of rapid warming? Urban Heat island effect and all?

But nothing to see here – Move On – You need to worry about the Predicted rise of 3- 4 F according to the computer models. Take no notice of the Actual trend. Trust us!

Houston temperature recent 3 months (Jan-Mar) 1980-2011

The trend for 1980 to 2011 is 0.88 F / Decade

Houston temperature recent 3 months (Jan-Mar) 1990-2011

The trend for 1990 to 2011 is – 0.12 F / Decade

Houston temperature recent 3 months (Jan-Mar) 2000-2011

The trend for 2000 to 2011 is – 1.27 F / Decade

So the “warming trend” 2000-2011 is exactly – 1.27 F degrees COOLER a decade.  That is a whopping – 12.7 F COOLER in 100 years. Take cover!

Wouldn’t you say that this is a prime example of rapid warming? Urban Heat island effect and all?

According to the computer models that the Global Warming Hysterics love so much, worship and blindly follows (especially our intelligent politicians), it should be EXACTLY the opposite.

And remember, this is the official data from the warmest of the warmest – temperature data from inside big cities.

And we are supposed to be very worried about a predicted rise of 3-4 F?

But not these ACTUAL trends?

And for this predicted trend the politicians want to take our societies back to the Stone Age. But, as usual, they DO NOTHING about the actual trend.

An interesting ”science” wouldn’t you say.

So to summarize this evidence of this “accelerated warming” trend:

New York trend 2000-2011 is exactly – 0.72 F degrees a decade

Los Angeles trend 2000-2011 is exactly 0.36 F degrees a decade.

Chicago trend 2000-2011 is exactly – 2.97 F degrees a decade.

Houston trend 2000-2011 is exactly – 1.27 F degrees a decade.

Another telling example of RAPID WARMING and an eminent treat to humankind!

That is truly “Global Warming” US style.

This is the “stuff” that “Global Warming” is made of.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=” http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>

Over 500 scientists behind the Manhattan declaration!

22 april, 2008

Manhattan deklarationen (”Global warming” is not a global crisis”) släpptes den 4 mars i år i New York under the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change. Nu har man kommit med en uppdaterad lista på alla vetenskapsmän (över 500 st) som undertecknat och stöder deklarationen.

De måste INTE ha lyssnat på Al Gore, IPCC et consortes som ju hävdar att det råder ”konsensus” och ”att debatten är över” och ”att det inte finns något att diskutera” samt att de är ”omoraliskt att ens ifrågasätta det hela”

Listan med alla namn finns efter deklarationen nedan.

Se även dessa inlägg från konferensen: The 2008 International Conference on Climate ChangeBasic Greenhouse Equations ”Totally Wrong” – ytterligare ett anförande från konferensen i New YorkFrom Climate Alarmism to Climate Realism – Václav Klaus anförande på konferensen den 4 mars

News release finns här:

http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=49&Itemid=1

Hundreds Sign Climate Realist Declaration ‘Global Warming’ is not a Global Crisis

International Climate Science Coalition releases signatories to the Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change

(Ottawa, Canada – April 22, 2008) The International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC) today released the names of over 500 endorsers of the Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change that calls on world leaders to ”reject the views expressed by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as well as popular, but misguided works such as ‘An Inconvenient Truth.'” All taxes, regulations, and other interventions intended to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) should ”be abandoned forthwith,” conclude declaration signatories.

Included in the endorser lists are world leading climate scientists, economists, policymakers, engineers, business leaders, medical doctors, as well as other professionals and concerned citizens from two dozen countries. The complete declaration text, endorser lists and international media contacts for expert commentary, may be viewed at http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/media1.php.

 Perhaps most significant among the declaration’s assertions:

”[T]here is no convincing evidence that CO2 emissions from modern industrial activity has in the past, is now, or will in the future cause catastrophic climate change.”

”[A]ttempts by governments to legislate costly regulations on industry and individual citizens to encourage CO2 reduction will slow development while having no appreciable impact on the future trajectory of global climate change. Such policies will markedly diminish future prosperity and so reduce the ability of societies to adapt to inevitable climate change, thereby increasing, not decreasing human suffering.”

 ”Just as the Manhattan Project was key to finally ending the World War II, the Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change may one day be regarded as a critical catalyst that helped end today’s climate hysteria,” said ICSC Science Advisory Board member Professor Bob Carter of James Cook University in Australia. ”Protecting the natural world is crucially important, and so environmental policy must be based on our best understanding of science and technology coupled with a realistic appreciation of the relevant economics and policy options. This is not happening in the climate debate.”

ICSC Chair, Professor Tim Patterson of Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada concludes, ”Instead of wasting billions restricting emissions of CO2, a vitally important gas on which all life depends, governments must concentrate on solving known environmental problems over which we have influence – air, land and water pollution being obvious examples.”

 The ICSC is an association of scientists, economists and energy and policy experts working to promote better public understanding of climate change. ICSC provides an analysis of climate science and policy issues which, being independent of lobby groups and vested political interests, is an alternative to advice from the IPCC. ICSC thereby fosters rational, evidence-based, open discussion about all climate, and climate-related, issues.

Manhattan declaration finns här:

http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=37&Itemid=1

 Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change

 ”Global warming” is not a global crisis

We, the scientists and researchers in climate and related fields, economists, policymakers, and business leaders, assembled at Times Square, New York City, participating in the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change,

 Resolving that scientific questions should be evaluated solely by the scientific method;

Affirming that global climate has always changed and always will, independent of the actions of humans, and that carbon dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant but rather a necessity for all life;

 Recognising that the causes and extent of recently-observed climatic change are the subject of intense debates in the climate science community and that oft-repeated assertions of a supposed ‘consensus’ among climate experts are false;

Affirming that attempts by governments to legislate costly regulations on industry and individual citizens to encourage CO2 emission reduction will slow development while having no appreciable impact on the future trajectory of global climate change.  Such policies will markedly diminish future prosperity and so reduce the ability of societies to adapt to inevitable climate change, thereby increasing, not decreasing human suffering;

 Noting that warmer weather is generally less harmful to life on Earth than colder:

 Hereby declare:

That current plans to restrict anthropogenic CO2 emissions are a dangerous misallocation of intellectual capital and resources that should be dedicated to solving humanity’s real and serious problems.

That there is no convincing evidence that CO2 emissions from modern industrial activity has in the past, is now, or will in the future cause catastrophic climate change.

That attempts by governments to inflict taxes and costly regulations on industry and individual citizens with the aim of reducing emissions of CO2 will pointlessly curtail the prosperity of the West and progress of developing nations without affecting climate.

That adaptation as needed is massively more cost-effective than any attempted mitigation, and that a focus on such mitigation will divert the attention and resources of governments away from addressing the real problems of their peoples.

That human-caused climate change is not a global crisis.

 Now, therefore, we recommend –

That world leaders reject the views expressed by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as well as popular, but misguided works such as ”An Inconvenient Truth”.

That all taxes, regulations, and other interventions intended to reduce emissions of CO2 be abandoned forthwith.

 Agreed at New York, 4 March 2008.

 De tre listorna med forskare och vetenskapsmän som undertecknat deklaration fins här och alla namnen finns nedan:

http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=48

http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=66

http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=62

Det finns även en fjärde lista med ”CITIZEN ENDORSERS OF THE DECLARATION NOT AT THE NEW YORK CONFERENCE” här:

http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=65&Itemid=1

  Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter</a>

(more…)


%d bloggare gillar detta: