Links tagged “cru”

Paul Homewood: "It is absolutely clear that the number of strong tornadoes has declined since the 1970s. Alarmingly, however, this page has been 'disappeared', and the link now comes up with this:

Fortunately Wayback still has a copy of the original web page, and I also have it on file. It is blindingly apparent that NOAA found their original assessment far too inconvenient, something that should be kept out of the public domain at all cost."

Physicist Dr. Lubos Motl: "The climate modeling hasn't led to any new yet reliable insights. In those 50 years, while the short-term weather models have made some progress, the long-term models have made virtually none and it is especially the case of the question about the magnitude of the influence of CO2 on the climate. All the relevant quantities (like the climate sensitivity) remained about as uncertain as when these modeling efforts were launched and the claim about the "reliable prediction of global warming" is a pure lie. So there is no reason for a Nobel Prize, especially not one that would go to somewhat random "physicists of the climate." ...

"The political motivation of this prize is 100% obvious. These people have been picked to steal a part of the credit accumulated by physics, the hardest discipline of sciences, and give it to one of the worst pseudoscientific superstitions of the contemporary era." ... 

"Al Gore got his one-half of a Nobel Prize for a fraudulent PowerPoint presentation about the catastrophic global warming because tons of dishonest leftists loved these kinds of anti-scientific lies."

The UN IPCC's “Optimal Fingerprinting” methodology on which they have long relied for attributing climate change to greenhouse gases is seriously flawed and its results are unreliable and largely meaningless.

The peer-reviewed paper, produced by a team of almost two dozen scientists from around the world, concluded that previous studies did not adequately consider the role of solar energy in explaining increased temperatures. The new study was released just as the UN released its sixth “Assessment Report,” known as AR6, that once again argued in favor of the view that man-kind’s emissions of CO2 were to blame for global warming...“Depending on which published data and studies you use, you can show that all of the warming is caused by the sun, but the IPCC uses a different data set to come up with the opposite conclusion,” lead study author Ronan Connolly, Ph.D. told The Epoch Times in a video interview. 
“In their insistence on forcing a so-called scientific consensus, the IPCC seems to have decided to consider only those data sets and studies that support their chosen narrative,” he added.

IPCC Author Jim Kossin, who works for The Climate Service, a consultancy firm which helps corporations navigate Biden’s push for climate risk disclosure,: “I think people are more and more starting to get scared,” said Jim Kossin, senior scientist with climate risk firm The Climate Service who was among the IPCC authors for the chapter on extremes. “I think that’ll help to change people’s attitudes. And hopefully that’ll affect the way they vote.”

Paul Homewood: "July temperature anomalies even according to NOAA themselves are well below the peaks of 2015 and 2016, and barely higher than they were two decades ago...

And the claim that they know the world’s temperature to one-hundredth of a degree is ridiculous. ...

Large parts of the world have no coverage at all, and much of the rest is affected by UHI. In contrast, satellites offer virtually 100% coverage, other around the poles, and are not corrupted by UHI. Data from these satellites indicate that atmospheric temperatures are no higher now than in 2002."

Scientists Joeri Rogelj and Piers Forster hold up signs urging reduction in carbon emissions after completing a major U.N. climate report, in a house in Harrogate, Britain August 7, 2021. Picture taken August 7, 2021. Stella Forster/Handout via REUTERS

Reuters: Scientists and government delegates finally approved the last part of their 3,949-page report over the weekend...Completing the politically sensitive "Summary for Policymakers" section, which 195 governments must approve by consensus, presented a particular challenge. Each word of each sentence needed to be scrutinized and debated. To help the effort, organisers displayed each sentence in yellow on a shared screen until it was approved, at which point it appeared in green. If it was rejected, it turned blue – signaling a revision was needed. Disputes then had to be resolved in virtual breakout sessions. "We spent sometimes hours on a footnote," said co-chair Valerie Masson-Delmotte, a climate scientist at the University of Paris-Saclay who described work on the report as a "marathon."

#

Warmist Prof. Andrew Dessler: "The high profile part of the IPCC reports are the Summary for Policymakers (SPM). These documents must be approved line-by-line by the member gov'ts. A sentence is only included if *every* gov't agrees with it." Dessler added: "They want countries to unanimously agree on every sentence of the Summary for Policymakers because these documents serve as the starting point for climate negotiations."