Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

Stewart Dimmock's high-profile fight to ban the film being shown in schools was depicted as a David and Goliath battle, with the Kent school governor taking on the state by arguing that the government was 'brainwashing' pupils...

The Observer has established that Dimmock's case was supported by a powerful network of business interests with close links to the fuel and mining lobbies. He was also supported by a Conservative councillor in Hampshire, Derek Tipp.

Dimmock credited the little-known New Party with supporting him in the test case but did not elaborate on its involvement...

The company's owner and chairman of the New Party, Robert Durward, is a long-time critic of environmentalists. With Mark Adams, a former private secretary to Tony Blair, he set up the Scientific Alliance, a not-for-profit body comprising scientists and non-scientists, which aims to challenge many of the claims about global warming.

Scientific Alliance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Interested in contributing to Wikipedia? •Jump to: navigation, search
The Scientific Alliance is a British industry-friendly organization that promotes biotechnology, genetically modified food, and climate change skepticism.

The group was created in 2001 by quarryman Robert Durward, director of the British Aggregates Association, and political consultant Mark Adams of the public relations firm, Foresight Communications.

The Scotsman newspaper has reported that on contacting the Alliance to ask about Durward's role, 'after some uncertainty, the switchboard it shares with a number of other firms denied any knowledge of Mr Durward's existence. Matthew Drinkwater, the one person responding to calls to its offices, could also be contacted by ringing the offices of Foresight Communications.'

Foresight Communications is a PR firm established by Mark Adams in January 2001. As well as The Scientific Alliance, its client list includes the British Aggregates Association and the New Party for Britain (also known as the People's Alliance). The New Party - also the name of Oswald Mosley's first party - is so right-wing that the Tory leader in Scotland, where it operates, has called it 'fascist and undemocratic'. Like the Scientific Alliance, this 'People's Alliance', was established by Durward and Adams.




Although the group's privacy policy prevents it from revealing its funders, critics like Bob May of the Royal Society have alleged that the group is linked to the U.S. oil company, ExxonMobil.

FROM THE BBC
------------------

'Unexpected growth' in CO2 found

Carbon dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere have risen 35% faster than expected since 2000, says a study.
International scientists found that inefficiency in the use of fossil fuels increased levels of CO2 by 17%.

The other 18% came from a decline in the natural ability of land and oceans to soak up CO2 from the atmosphere.

About half of emissions from human activity are absorbed by natural "sinks" but the efficiency of these sinks has fallen, the study suggests.

The research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), was carried out by the Global Carbon Project, the University of East Anglia, UK, and the British Antarctic Survey.

It found that improvements in the carbon intensity of the global economy have stalled since 2000, leading to an unexpected jump in atmospheric CO2.

"In addition to the growth of global population and wealth, we now know that significant contributions to the growth of atmospheric CO2 arise from the slow-down of natural sinks and the halt to improvements in the carbon intensity of wealth production," said the study's lead author, Dr Pep Canadell, executive director of the Global Carbon Project.

Global sink

The weakening of the Earth's ability to cope with greenhouse gases is thought to be a result of changing wind patterns over seas and droughts on land.

"The decline in global sink efficiency suggests that stabilisation of atmospheric CO2 is even more difficult to achieve than previously thought," said report co-author Dr Corinne Le Quere of the British Antarctic Survey.

"We found that nearly half of the decline in the efficiency of the ocean CO2 sink is due to the intensification of the winds in the Southern Ocean."

The declining power of the seas to soak up industrial pollution is not only being recorded in the southern hemisphere, however.

According to a separate 10-year study published recently, the effect is also being seen in the North Atlantic.

... the Indians set fires on purpose from time to time to enhance conditions.
Question in regard to this activity by the Indians who we are told by some that they were in perfect harmony with nature, was this activity a part of nature and totally consistent with environmental balance?

Heavy Editing Is Alleged In Climate Testimony

By H. Josef Hebert
Associated Press
Wednesday, October 24, 2007; Page A10

Testimony that the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention planned to give yesterday to a Senate committee about the impact of climate change on health was significantly edited by the White House, according to two sources familiar with the documents.

Specific scientific references to potential health risks were removed after Julie L. Gerberding submitted a draft of her prepared remarks to the White House Office of Management and Budget for review...

A CDC official familiar with both versions said Gerberding's draft "was eviscerated," cut from 14 pages to four. The version presented to the Senate committee consisted of six pages...

The Bush administration has been accused by government scientists of pressuring them to emphasize the uncertainties of global warming. Earlier this year, climate scientists complained to a House committee that the administration had sought frequently to manage or influence their statements and public appearances...

But did the editing remove anything that was meaningful??? No specifics are offered on that critical point.

Anyone who has exercised a management role of any kind in an hierarchical organization has had the experience of compressing and editing the off point polemics and wanderings of his/her deputies in written reports.

In addition the executive branch of the government is led by the President. It is not a debating forum for low-level bureaucrats.

In that case, there should not be even an implication that what is being presented is anything other then partisan political opinion - basically rendering the process entirely useless.

If there is no expectation of objectivity whatsoever from scientists who are employed by the gov't, then I don't really care what they have to say - ever.

Cycloptichorn

Cycloptichorn wrote:

In that case, there should not be even an implication that what is being presented is anything other then partisan political opinion - basically rendering the process entirely useless.

If there is no expectation of objectivity whatsoever from scientists who are employed by the gov't, then I don't really care what they have to say - ever.

Cycloptichorn

Scientists bicker with one another all the time. Our government is not merely an amplifier for the opinions of the bureaucrat/scientists it employs - any more than it is an amplifier for the policy paper shufflers who inhabit its other compartments in the executive Branch.

Bush aide says warming man-made
By Roger Harrabin
Environment analyst, BBC News



The US chief scientist has told the BBC that climate change is now a fact.
Professor John Marburger, who advises President Bush, said it was more than 90% certain that greenhouse gas emissions from mankind are to blame.

The Earth may become "unliveable" without cuts in CO2 output , he said, but he labelled targets for curbing temperature rise as "arbitrary".

His comments come shortly before major meetings on climate change at the UN and the Washington White House.

There may still be some members of the White House team who are not completely convinced about climate change - but it is clear that the science advisor to the President and director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy is not one of them.

In the starkest warning from the White House so far about the dangers ahead, Professor Marburger told the BBC that climate change was unequivocal, with mankind more than 90% likely to blame.


The CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere and there's no end point, it just gets hotter and hotter

Quote:

Marburger interview

Despite disagreement on the details of climate science, he said: "I think there is widespread agreement on certain basics, and one of the most important is that we are producing far more CO2 from fossil fuels than we ought to be.

"And it's going to lead to trouble unless we can begin to reduce the amount of fossil fuels we are burning and using in our economies."

Trouble ahead

This is an explicit endorsement of the latest major review of climate science from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Professor Marburger said humanity would be in trouble if we did not stop increasing carbon emissions.


"The CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere and there's no end point, it just gets hotter and hotter, and so at some point it becomes unliveable," he said.
Professor Marburger said he wished he could stop US emissions right away, but that was obviously not possible.

US backing for the scientific consensus was confirmed by President Bush's top climate advisor, James Connaughton.

The chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality told BBC News that advancing technology was the best way to curb the warming trend.

"You only have two choices; you either have advanced technologies and get them into the marketplace, or you shut down your economies and put people out of work," he said.

"I don't know of any politician that favours shutting down economies."

'Arbitrary' targets

Mr Bush has invited leaders of major developed and developing nations to the White House later this month for discussions on a future global direction on climate change.

It will follow a UN General Assembly session on the same issue.

Last week the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum in Sydney backed the UN climate convention as the right body for developing future global policy.

The European Union wants such a policy to adopt its own target of stabilising temperature rise at or below 2C.

But Mr Marburger said the state of the science made it difficult to justify any particular target.

"It's not clear that we'll be in a position to predict the future accurately enough to make policy confidently for a long time," he said.

"I think 2C is rather arbitrary, and it's not clear to me that the answer shouldn't be 3C or more or less. It's a hunch, a guess."

The truth, he said, was that we just do not know what the 'safe' limit is.

Marburger said: "Climate change can have broad implications for our environment, and that is why the president has put forward an aggressive strategy to develop the best science and technology to address the issue."

see full report :
WASHINGTON POST

The Bush administration has shown a consistent pattern of suppressing theevidence when it shows something unfavorable to the political interests it espouses

george

If your thesis is that this example above (and the many others which have preceded it) are merely instances of editing for brevity or concision, then you simply have not been paying attention.