| This picture of Mount Everest was take from the top of Gokyo Ri (in Nepal). Click on it to see a bigger version. |  |
Climategate: The Ongoing Search for Peer Review
I hear they’re telling a joke at the International Panel on Climate Change: Knock knock. Who’s there? Peer Review. Peer Review who? Your guess is as good as mine.
But seriously, I thought it was bad enough when a single reference to a piece of speculative fiction about Himalayan glaciers made it into a “peer-reviewed” IPCC report. But it turns out to be a trend. Says the Telegraph via Hot Air, in reference to another outlandish prediction:
Don’t laugh. The reverberations in the IPCC’s echo chamber might damage some eardrums.
But seriously, I thought it was bad enough when a single reference to a piece of speculative fiction about Himalayan glaciers made it into a “peer-reviewed” IPCC report. But it turns out to be a trend. Says the Telegraph via Hot Air, in reference to another outlandish prediction:
At first sight, the reference looks kosher enough but, following it through, one sees:One can only imagine how many more references to activist groups are lurking in this and other IPCC literature. It’s as though the IPCC creates its works without anybody ever giving anything a critical evaluation, making Peer Review a truly Orwellian expression and IPCC our very own Minisci, producing as much science as Miniluv produced love.
Rowell, A. and P.F. Moore, 2000: Global Review of Forest Fires. WWF/IUCN,This, then appears to be another WWF report, carried out in conjunction with the IUCN – The International Union for Conservation of Nature.
Gland, Switzerland, 66 pp. http://www.iucn.org/themes/fcp/publications
/files/global_review_forest_fires.pdf.
Don’t laugh. The reverberations in the IPCC’s echo chamber might damage some eardrums.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFollow the money. This glaciergate claim of the Himilayan Glaciers being gone by 2035 was used to blackmail money, and lots of it.
ReplyDeleteThen there's around 15 (and counting) reports referenced by the IPCC report, which were non-peer-reviewed and done by the WWF, which is certainly not a non-partisan nor very scientific, organization. It's like if the IPCC allowed Big Oil to insert THEIR studies in the report without them being peer-reviewed. It's THAT serious.
But then we always knew these LIEberals lie to get their way, truth and facts be damned. It's hilarious to me that Bush's presidency was accused of being against science but the LIEberal's LIES are coming home to roost and Obummer and the Hypocrats are big cheerleaders for these lies and corruption of science via money and politics.
Climate change is real I don't care what you say. This proves nothing. Bruce you asked me to come to your blog and then you block me. I had my friends go over and post on there and now none of us can post. Why didn't you say anything about the rally? You need to get your act together or we will be back where we started with health care. Maybe you should look into the Supreme Court and give your readers some guidance on what to do.
ReplyDeleteSure J. Higgins. Don't you mean "global warming" is real? Why is it "climate change" all of a sudden??!?! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHA ... why this climate change nonsense is reminiscent of another very recent PANIC CRISIS, swine flu, remember that one? The next big plague? BWAAAAHAHAHAHA:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/013216.html
At the height of the pandemic scare, UK's Chief Medical Officer warned of up to 65,000 deaths. The death toll now stands at 251; and the UK Government is now trying to offload up to £1 billion worth of unwanted swine flu vaccines.
Bruce give "guidance" ??? As it pertains to Legal and Constitutional matters? Let alone chewing gum and walking? Be serious !
ReplyDeleteSo what, scientists are people too and liable to make mistakes. At least they own up to caring for this planet and the people and creatures that populate it.
ReplyDeleteEquating the incredible output of harmful greenhouse gases by humans to a potential pandemic? I don't get it.
J.Higgins said...
ReplyDelete"Climate change is real I don't care what you say."
Yep, along with the Loch Ness Monster, The Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus and Hope and Change.
Don those tin-foil hats folks,not very warm in this weather but apparetly vogue.
"Equating the incredible output of harmful greenhouse gases by humans to a potential pandemic? I don't get it".
ReplyDeleteThats the problem, you don't get it. There is NO pandemic, it is called the seasonal flu.
As for the former,again there is NO "incredible output of harmful greenhouse gases by humans". Co2 is not, repeat NOT a harmful emission but rather nessesary to human,animal and plant LIFE.
You say scientists are human and therefore prone to mistakes, why do own up to your mistake in believing them?
BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA Christopher you are one funny guy. Love your blog. Mr.Xyz, that video is awesome. I laught my but off. Even the progressives will like it.
ReplyDeleteDrew, Drew, Drew; mistakes are one thing. Intentionally lying and mis-representing data in order to funnel obscene amounts of taxpayer money to your boondoggle and shouting down anyone who disagrees with your junk science is a whole other thing altogether. If I may paraphrase Jeep, "It's a LIEberal thing". If it isn't criminal it should be. I hope it is, and I hope these bastards are prosecuted to the full extent of the law. And that includes that a-hole Waxman, Algore, and all the other Hypocrats who push this junk science.
ReplyDeleteChris, have you seen this? Two different links but they relate to each other:
ReplyDeletehttp://mjperry.blogspot.com/2010/01/jobs-and-jobless-rates-private-vs.html
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/01/27/income_angst_not_for_public_employees/
I like this one, where Obummer acts like he has and had nothing to do with the shady dealings that he in fact has everything to do with:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obama-pretends-he-didnt-sign-off-on-the-shady-health-care-deals-82699357.html
Obama: 'I didn't sign off on those shady health care deals.' Really? By: John McCormack
01/26/10
Mary Katharine Ham notes that President Obama tells ABC:
“Let's just clarify. I didn't make a bunch of deals [on health care]. ... There is a legislative process that is taking place in Congress and I am happy to own up to the fact that I have not changed Congress and how it operates the way I would have liked.”
But the Washington Post reported on December 20 that Obama's top aides were involved in the negotiations with Nelson:
Schumer, who spent more than 13 hours in Reid's office Friday, said the Medicaid issue was settled around lunchtime, and the final eight hours of the talks focused on the abortion language. Boxer estimated she spent seven hours in Reid's offices -- without ever once sitting in the same room, even though they were all of 25 steps apart.
Reid and Schumer kept up the "shuttle negotiation" between the leader's conference room and his top aide's office, Boxer said. Keenly aware how tense the talks were, the White House dispatched two aides who together have decades of experience in the Senate -- Jim Messina and Peter Rouse -- to work with Nelson. They relayed their intelligence to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, who monitored the talks from a dinner in Georgetown.
Perhaps Messina and Rouse just showed up to provide the "Christmas cookies" that Reid and Schumer chowed down to sustain themselves during the tense negotiations, but it's hard to believe that Obama's aides didn't sign off on both the abortion and Medicaid backroom deals.
Michelle Malkin sums it up:
The unmitigated chutzpah here is so blinding that I don’t just need sunglasses to protect my eyes. I need blackout curtains. Watch President Obama blame Congress for Demcare bribery and sabotage of transparency. As if Rahm and all the senior goons in the White House weren’t twisting arms and cracking heads to ensure that the deal met their boss’s timeline. As if the Cadillac tax break for unions hadn’t been hashed out at 1600 Pennsylvania.
John you are right that is a good post on mjperry.
ReplyDeleteHouse progressives organizing to rescue health care reform are pressuring their Senate counterparts to go back to the provision that has most energized the party and a majority of Americans throughout the debate: The public option.
ReplyDeleteThe effort was discussed during a closed-door meeting on Tuesday night, with a faction arguing that the best way to salvage reform is to persuade the Senate to pass the public health insurance option using the budget reconciliation process that needs only a majority vote.
They argued that the current bill before the House, which passed the Senate, lacks the votes needed to pass because pro-life Democrats don't believe the abortion restrictions go far enough and progressive Democrats don't like the lack of a public option, the weak affordability measures or the tax on private insurance. And nobody likes the Cornhusker Kickback, a provision won by Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson that would cover the state's Medicaid bills in perpetuity. Not even Nelson likes it anymore.
So, in order to move health care through the House, Democrats either need to pick up progressives or conservatives. And the budget reconciliation process does not lend itself to altering abortion language reform, because that wouldn't have a direct, substantial impact on the budget.
That leaves progressives as the bloc available to pick up. Their demands -- changes related to the tax on insurance, a Medicaid or Medicare expansion, and a public option -- would likely be allowable using reconciliation. (The Senate parliamentarian would have the final say.)
Two House freshmen, Reps. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) and Jared Polis (D-Colo.), circulated a letter, looking for signatures, that will be delivered to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Thursday on behalf of the plan, Polis told HuffPost.
"It is very likely that the public option could have passed the Senate, if brought up under majority-vote 'budget reconciliation' rules," reads the letter. "While there were valid reasons stated for not using reconciliation before, especially given that some important provisions of health care reform wouldn't qualify under the reconciliation rules, those reasons no longer exist."
Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/27/house-progress...
Idiot Hypocrats, please go nuclear and then be swept away in 2010 and 2012. J. Higgins you set my heart all aflutter when you talk about destroying your political party. Keep up the good work!
ReplyDeleteNobama Is Going to be A One Termer for SO many Reasons ,Higgens and those Progressives ARE Going to Make it SO! Bless You!
ReplyDeleteCitizens Are NOT Going to Be Happy With Nobama Care that is Pushed ,Bribed, and Best of All Debated Behind CLOSED Doors! This might Work in Cuba BUT We Aint CUBA!
This Administration IS Going to PAY a Heavy Price for Their Snake Like Behavior and thats the ,BRUCE Block Your Ears, the TRUTH!
Regarding Scientist that MAKE Mistakes! Are You Saying Deleting Info That Does NOT Fit YOUR Theory is a MISTAKE I Personnely Think its a CRIME!