The Sound Of Settled Science

Climate Cult 44 Comments

And now, Douglas J. Keenan raises serious questions about the Chinese surface station data (PDF);

This report concerns two research papers co-authored by Wei-Chyung Wang, a professor at the University at Albany, State University of New York. The two papers are as follows.

Jones P.D., Groisman P.Y., Coughlan M., Plummer N., Wang W.-C., Karl T.R. (1990), “Assessment of urbanization effects in time series of surface air temperature over land”, Nature, 347: 169–172.
Wang W.-C., Zeng Z., Karl T.R. (1990), “Urban heat islands in China”, Geophysical Research Letters, 17: 2377–2380.

Each paper compares temperature data from some meteorological stations in China, over the years 1954–1983. (The first paper also considers data from stations in the USSR and Australia; Wang was only involved in Chinese data, and so the other stations are irrelevant here.) The first paper is quite important: it is cited for resolving a major issue in the most recent assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC, 2007].
[,,,]
Regarding station movements over time, the papers of Jones et al. and Wang et al. make the following statements.

The stations were selected on the basis of station history: we chose those with few, if any, changes in instrumentation, location or observation times. [Jones et al.]
They were chosen based on station histories: selected stations have relatively few, if any, changes in instrumentation, location, or observation times…. [Wang et al.]

Those statements are essential for the papers.
[…]
The essential point here is that the quoted statements from Jones et al. and Wang et al. cannot be true and could not be in error by accident. The statements are fabricated.

Keenan states that as a result of his report, Wang’s university is holding a misconduct investigation.*.
Via Anthony Watts (if you’re looking for the short form).
Related: “Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt.”.

A Class Act

Political Animal 17 Comments

Sunday afternoon as I was heading out the gate, a small car pulled up and a friend jumped out to chat for a few minutes. She’s looking forward to a career change and (I hope) some well-earned down time after years of hard work in the trenches. She was making the rounds to pay her regards.
I’m sure that she had better things to do and more important people to see, but I was touched (as was Lance whom she’d stopped to see earlier) that Canada’s Minister of National Revenue would take the time to drive out “to the middle of nowhere” to thank a couple of lowly bloggers for their support.
It was a pleasure, Carol, to be of whatever small assistance we could in helping out. You deserved it, you earned it, and you’ll be missed.

The Prime Minister’s statement.

Oh, That Liberal Media: Protecting The Guilty

Media 41 Comments

Sometimes it’s what they don’t want you to know;

There’s almost nothing about the suspect, and even less about the gruesome nature of the crimes. Instead, the [Associated Press] piece mainly goes into great detail to stress that the victims had promising lives.
Why? As details, aren’t the gruesome nature of what happened to them, the fiendish nature of the principal defendant, and the callused insensitivity of the criminal justice system, at least as important?
Rarely have I seen a story so long and yet so woefully incomplete at the same time. Newark is in the New York area, and you’d think that if a report about crime there was important enough to merit treatment on the front page of the Inquirer that they’d at least supply the details.
To find them, I had to turn to the New York Daily News.

On a similar theme, though completely different topic, witness the coverage (including Tom Walters’ on-air version of this CTV report) in which great effort is taken to implicate a retiring Karl Rove in the Plame affair – coverage that manages to avoid any mention of the name of Richard Armitage.

No reporter or lawyer concerned with the case believes that Novak’s original source was any other than Richard Armitage. I have heard it lamely said that, if true, this would “undercut” the idea that Wilson and Plame were targets of an administration vendetta. No. it wouldn’t “undercut” the idea. It would annihilate it. Mr. Armitage exceeds even his own former boss and current best friend Colin Powell in visceral hatred of the neoconservatives. In that sense, and in his collusion with Bob Woodward on the story of the origins of the war, he actually is a “partisan gunslinger”—but on the Wilson side of the argument.

So how does one explain this? How can a “foreign correspondent” working for a major Canadian network not know facts fundamental to one of the most heavily reported political “scandals” in recent US politics?
You’re not expected to answer that. They are.

SWEEP: Foxes And Hen Houses?

Gopher News 38 Comments

An email from a reader raises some provocative questions;

It appears that the manufacturers of electronics have teamed up with a compliant Sask. government to create a so called recycling program, with little input or involvment from environmental organizations and could be beyond public scrutiny.
How did Saskatchewan eWaste program and the governing body SWEEP come into existence? Well, it all started with a group of electronic producers forming EPSC (the Electronic Producers Stewardship Council). (see: http://www.epsc.ca/about.html)
Note all the industry members:
The founding members of EPS Canada are 16 leading electronics manufacturers: Apple Canada Inc.; Brother International Corporation (Canada) Ltd.; Canon Canada Inc.; Dell Canada; Epson Canada Ltd.; Hewlett-Packard (Canada) Co.; Hitachi Canada Ltd.; IBM Canada Ltd.; Lexmark Canada Inc.; LG Electronics Canada; Panasonic Canada Inc.; Sanyo Canada Inc.; Sharp Electronics of Canada Ltd.; Sony of Canada Ltd.; Thomson Multimedia Ltd.; and Toshiba of Canada Ltd. The organization was created through the joint efforts of the Information Technology Association of Canada (ITAC) and Electro-Federation Canada (EFC).
Please also note the complete lack of environmental organization representation.
In a speech made by Vice Chair, Andre Hudon in Toronto, Ontario, on November 14th, 2003 (see: http://www.epsc.ca/pdfs/hudon_welcome_speech.pdf)
Andre states: ‘We represent over 90 percent of the lap top computer, printer and television market. We represent all desktop manufacturers with significant market share. We see EPS Canada as the industry organization to be called upon to work with the regulating authority for program implementation.’
Clearly, the EPSC represent the electronics production industry.
Could it be possible that EPSC and its member companies might attempt to lobby Government to exert influence over environmental policy to negotiate favorable environmental legislation for the large corporations?
See a Speech by President and CEO of EPSC and SWEEP Executive Director David Betts here (http://www.epsc.ca/pdfs/CCME_Speech.pdf) where he says ‘We have a window of opportunity to influence that legislation’.
Also according to a speech made at E-Scrap by EPSC President and CEO David Betts in Orlando Florida on October 22nd 2003 (see last paragraph of this document: http://www.epsc.ca/pdfs/betts_orlando_speech.pdf ; ‘We believe our approach of seeking the most cost effective and environmentally responsible program through consultation with governments will deliver the best results for our industry.’
(Please Note: Not best results for the environment. Not best results for the public’s best interest, but the best results for ‘Our industry’.)
It certainly appears that the EPSC will be exerting its influence with respect to environmental legislation and be on the look out for the best interests of the EPSC member companies.
I wonder, is there a government anywhere in Canada willing to compromise and play ball with such a self centered self promoting industry organization?
In, Feb 2006, EPSC submits an industry led product stewardship plan to the Government of Saskatchewan. In May 2006, the Government of Saskatchewan approves the stewardship plan submitted. (Well, it appears that the EPSC has found its compliant Government.)
Shortly there after, EPSC then creates a non profit organization called SWEEP to administer the plan.
Now, let’s have a look at the board of directors of SWEEP:
We see Sean DeVries of Panasonic Canada as Chair, Nick Aubry of Sony Canada, Rebecca Brown of Dell Canada, etc, etc, etc and David Betts of EPSC as Executive Director. Oh, wait a moment, let’s have a look at the board of directors of EPSC. (See: http://www.epsc.ca/a_board.html) We see the brands of Dell Canada , Sony Canada , Panasonic Canada listed (amongst a few other well known brands such as HP, Toshiba, etc) and David Betts as President and CEO of EPSC. (David Betts has recently stepped down and has been replaced)
What is up with this? Many of the same people and companies of EPSC are also represented on the board of SWEEP. It would appear that the industry not only makes products, but it is now in charge of the disposal of the same products they make. Have the foxes just been put in charge of the hen house?
Can we trust electronic producers to police? Has our government sold our environment out to product producers or representatives of producer’s interests? How independent and arms length is this program, and does it represent the public’s best interests? Or does this ewaste program reflect only the interests of the corporations behind it?
These might be some very tough questions to put to the Minister responsible.
Who is exactly paying for development of the SWEEP program? Again, I refer to Mr. David Betts’ speech in Orlando : (see: http://www.epsc.ca/pdfs/betts_orlando_speech.pdf) and I quote: ‘We consider the financing we have received an advance that will be paid back to members following program introduction.’
Just how much money raised from Ewaste recycling fees are being diverted to repay EPSC and it’s member companies? Can the general public who is PAYING ewaste fees every time they purchase a computer or television review or audit the funds and how they are spent?
According to the regulations (see: http://www.qp.gov.sk.ca/documents/English/Regulations/Regulations/E10-21R4.pdf) the Minister of Environment has the power to administer, suspend, change or amend the program in the best interests of the public. In fact, if you look closely at 5(1) to (3), all the power of this regulation rests soley with the Minister of the Environment. I think he will have much to answer for if the Sask Ewaste program turns out to be just another half hearted Green program.

Hmmmm…..
Here’s more.
And in the comments, John Chittick sums it up nicely – “There’s no problem with the concept of Life Cycle Management but a closed loop of corporate rent-seekers enshrined into coercive regulations doesn’t allow the free market to function.”
While SWEEP is governed by reporting rules under the rules governing non-profits, they are not subject to provincial audit. Further comments from reader mail:

How did SARCAN get the contract for collecting and processing eWaste? Can the minister please produce a copy of the tender?

Lots of discussion, pro and con, in the comments.
Tuesday update: a reader from another province has further observations;

I work for one of the companies engaged in this project and from the
information I was able to gather, it would appear as though electronics companies have formed a united lobby for the purpose of implementing consistent universal regulations for the recycling of electronics, which will generally work in the company’s favour.
It seems they may have picked up the scent of impending regulatory restrictions and decided to pre-empt with their own lobby, in order to shape the manner of the regulations.
The existing program in BC involves an environmental levy being charged on electronics sold in the province, and submitted to the government to subsidize their recycling program. Our company employs an Environmental Ambassador who’s full time job is to coordinate programs like this. He is currently engaged in the task of directing each of our retailers to institute a program which will see them submit the levy to the government on our behalf, for each purchase made through their store, thus avoiding the need for us to track purchases and submit the fees ourselves. As
of August 1, all electronics purchases will have this levy charged at point of purchase but the program for submitting to the government does not appear to be in place yet and there seems to be some ambiguity regarding how this program will be administered.
Speaking strictly for my company, I find it staggering the number of restrictions and costly measures this company voluntarily inflicts upon itself, in order to bolster its green credentials. They are eager to implement anything which serves their interests but ofttimes their interests lean more towards being green than being capitalistic. Then again, in these eco-frantic times, maybe being green is the most capitalistic measure.

Heil Hezbollah (bumped)

Great Moments In Socialism 181 Comments

When the concept of “multiculturalism” was introduced to Canadians, most assumed it meant “more pavilions at Folkfest”.

UPDATE – the billboard’s backers defend their actions. (Nasrallah. Jesus. What’s the difference, really?) … and plenty of reaction from the paper’s readers. (scroll to bottom)
Update 2 – Reader “Geothermal” posts this email in the comments:

Hello,
Your comments have been forwarded to the Mayor’s office. Please note, the billboard has been removed as of this morning.
Thank you for using 311.
Sincerely,
Sean McCorkell
311 Acting Supervisor
311@city.windsor.on.ca

Rove Departs

Political Animal 32 Comments

From a WSJ report that can’t decide whether it’s news or editorial;

Mr. Rove, who has held a senior post in the White House since President Bush took office in January 2001, told Mr. Gigot he first floated the idea of leaving a year ago. But he delayed his departure as, first, Democrats took Congress, and then as the White House tackled debates on immigration and Iraq, he said. He said he decided to leave after White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten told senior aides that if they stayed past Labor Day they would be obliged to remain through the end of the president’s term in January 2009.
“I just think it’s time,” Mr. Rove said in the interview. “There’s always something that can keep you here, and as much as I’d like to be here, I’ve got to do this for the sake of my family.” Mr. Rove and his wife have a home in Ingram, Texas, and a son who attends college in nearby San Antonio.

(This passage of John D. McKinnon’s piece borders on the bizarre – “Mr. Rove established himself as the political genius behind the rise of George W. Bush and the brief period of united Republican rule. But he did it largely through highly divisive policies and campaign tactics, such as the attacks on Democratic rival John Kerry the 2004 campaign. That strategy appears to have backfired, as seen in the Republican loss of Congress in 2006, and Mr. Bush’s low poll numbers.” Since when is it off limits to “attack” one’s political opponent?)
Update: Looks like I’m not alone;

…in the minds of the MSM, it is George Bush who is the “divider,” not the Democrats and the left who have been vilifying him for over six years now as an election stealer, a warmonger, a chimpanzee, a torturer, a war criminal–despite his acquiescing to (in partnership with Ted Kennedy) much of the liberal political agenda, with an expansion of Medicare, federal control over education, a new amnesty for illegal immigrants, and a general expansion of government on almost all fronts. All of which was pushed by the evil mastermind, Karl Rove.

The Corner is your best bet for reaction from the American right. The American left will remain its usual bipolar self.

Shuttle Pics

Science 5 Comments

While it’s the damage to Endeavour’s tiles that dominates the news this morning (hard to know whether it’s as serious as it sounds, given the media’s insistance on sensationalizing any event that brings with it a degree of risk), reader “L’il Walter” passed along a series of photos taken on launch day.
shuttle1.jpg
(I’ve been remiss in mentioning that Dave Williams, who is charged with making the repairs, is Saskatoon born.)
Click here for more.

God Save The Beeb

Media 13 Comments

Confessions of a BBC liberal;

It started with the BBC’s own report on impartiality that effectively admitted to an institutional “liberal” bias among programme makers. Previously these accusations had been dismissed as a right-wing rant, but since the report was published even the BBC’s allies seem to accept it.
[…]
Ever since 1963 the institutions have been the villains of the media liberals. The police, the armed services, the courts, political parties, multi-national corporations – when things go wrong they are the usual suspects.
But our hostility to institutions was not – and is not – shared by the majority of our fellow citizens: most of our opinions were at odds with the majority of the audience and the electorate. Indeed the BBC’s own 2007 report on impartiality found that 57% of poll respondents said that “broadcasters often fail to reflect the views of people like me”.
There are four new factors which in my lifetime have brought about the changes that have shaped media liberalism, encouraged its spread and significantly increased its influence and importance.

You’ll see lots you recognize.

“Sifting through bad rhetoric to find the truth”

Blogging 64 Comments

I don’t usually bother with liberal left bloggers who waste their time slagging me. (Too many, for one thing.) But sometimes, one just has to make an exception.
“Lisa” of In The House And Senate didn’t think much of Alan Mutter’s post comparing the traffic SDA sent to his blog vs that sent by several major US media outlets;

The post that caused so many to link to SDA had to do with the neo-cons jumping all over a report that challenges some popular theories on climate change. It has a poorly executed, hazy pic of of a dino lying in the sand with a caption – “Not Waiting For The Asteroid.” The comments consist of the usual incestuous discourse of Flat Earthers, climate change deniers, and creationists mocking those who are foolish enough to believe the thousands of reports that challenge the one McMillan alludes to. You know, those of us who actually studied evolution, genetics, physics, climatology, and those of us who read in-depth on these issues, analyse and compare reports, and apply logic rather than the teachings of a religious text.
K. Mc’s was not a brilliant post, or a well researched piece. It simply offered a bad picture, a handful of right-wing comments making fun of people who actually understand evolution and believe in it, and a link to a report by a scientist.

Here’s the “poorly researched” post she speaks of: Not Waiting For The Asteroid. The opening of that it links to reads as follows:

News stock slide accelerates
The publicly held newspaper stocks lost another $2 billion of value in the first six months of 2007 on top of the $13.5 billion decline they suffered in the prior two years.

That’s right. She wrote two full paragraphs referencing global warming and evolution to critique a post designed to draw attention to the falling values of newspaper stocks.
Wait! It gets better. (You knew it had to).
Lisa’s profile?
housesenate.jpg

Good News For The Fart Jar Industry

Great Moments In Socialism 50 Comments

Ladies and Gentleman – open your wallets and extend a great big welcome to Canada’s new Air Registry;

A group of provincial leaders pushing for hard climate change measures failed to gain consensus on Friday, but were consoled with an agreement by all 13 leaders to start a national greenhouse gas emissions registry.
“I’m not suggesting this is Earth shattering,” said B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell…

“Earth shattering”?
Those are hardly the first words that come to mind.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation