Written by Science & Environmental Policy Project
By Ken Haapala, Executive Vice President, Science and Environmental Policy Project
EPA has carefully prepared a trap, but will it trap itself? It has played hard ball in its Endangerment Finding that carbon dioxide emissions "endanger human health and welfare." But faced with the hard reality that Copenhagen was a failure, public enthusiasm for carbon dioxide controls is falling, and that the Kerry-Lieberman cap and tax bill may not pass, EPA came out with a "tailoring rule" to slowly implement carbon dioxide regulation.
First, only those emitting 50,000 tons per year will be regulated. Then the regulations will gradually apply to others. But EPA has no legal authority to make this rule because the law states emissions as low as 250 tons (every large building) must be regulated. Thus, EPA is inventing law.
The FORUM by SEPP and Virginia Scientists and Engineers for Energy and Environment (VA-SEEE) is being rescheduled to tentatively 5:30 pm on Sunday June 20 in the Auditorium of the Ernst Community Cultural Center of the Annandale Campus of Northern Virginia Community College at 8333 Little River Turnpike, Annandale. Topics will include some of the latest developments in global warming issues. All are welcome. To defray the costs of the auditorium, a donation of $5.00 per person is suggested. Firm commitments will be announced as soon as possible. (www.vaseee.org)
Scores of environmental lawyers stand ready to collect massive legal fees, courtesy of the taxpayer by suing EPA for not fully enforcing the law. No doubt, EPA will do what it usually does, show some resistance and then roll in favor of the environmental lawyers. Herein is the danger to EPA. If cap and tax is not passed, and EPA enforces stringent regulations, the politicians who support EPA may soon be out of their jobs.
Senator Murkowski has proposed a simple, eight line bill that will remove from EPA the responsibility of regulating carbon dioxide. Under the Murkowski bill the responsibility of regulating carbon dioxide emissions will fall on the peoples' representatives in Congress - where it should be.
Those representing scientific organizations defending Michael Mann continue to misstate the meaning of "hide the decline." The issue is how well do tree ring measurement techniques approximate temperature measurements by instruments? Is there a solid correspondence between the results of tree ring techniques and the results of instrument measurements? If the correspondence is solid, than tree ring techniques can be used (with caution) to estimate temperatures when no instrument measurements are available. If the correspondence is poor, then the technique is not valid.
The "Nature trick" to "hide the decline" was not to hide temperature measurements by instruments which showed a rise in temperatures. The trick was to hide the divergence between tree ring techniques and instrument measurements after 1979 by removing "unsuitable" tree ring data. The tree rings indicated a no warming while the instruments showed a warming. Had the data been fully presented, then the validity of tree rings as a proxy for instrument measurements would have been questioned. The issue is not, as expressed by the Washington Post and others, allowing the public to better understand the research. The issue is misleading the public.
In an editorial attacking Fred Singer for defending Virginia Attorney General Cuccinelli in his demand for Mann's documents, editor-in-chief Rudy Baum of the Chemical & Engineering News completely misstates the issue. Please see "This and That On Climate" in the Articles section.
Late news: Rather than comply with the demand by Virginia Attorney General Cuccinelli, the University of Virginia petitioned the local circuit court to set aside the demand. More on this as it develops.
Students of The Great War (WW I) have long wondered what mania compelled leaders of the great nations of Europe, the most prosperous on earth, to such a disastrous, destructive war. What mania compelled generals who repeatedly witnessed that well prepared defenses annihilated troops in a frontal assault, to order their demoralized, depleted armies to another frontal assault -- One. Last. Time.
Perhaps we are witnessing that mania in the leadership of the European Union.
Many nations of Europe are still suffering from a prolonged recession. Many are experiencing a financial crisis brought on by fiscal irresponsibility, in part from pursuit of prosperity from green jobs which disappear when subsidies stop.
The leaders of the European Union have noticed that due to the recession, resulting in reduced carbon dioxide emissions, some nations are too close to achieving their goals of a 20% reduction by 2020. Apparently this is too easy, so the goal must be raised to 30% by 2020 to lead others on to victory. Depression anyone? Into the breach, men! One. Last. Time.
Prompted by Fellows who objected to their publication that portrayed that the science of global warming is settled, the Royal Society in England agreed to review their publications in light of the current science. The Society has been an adamant promoter of climate alarmism.
A traditional debate was held on global warming at the Oxford Union. The no-longer-to-be-called skeptics thrashed the alarmists. Please see the first two referenced articles under "Challenging the Orthodoxy." The first reference is to Nigel Lawson's full address, which emphasized that the issue goes beyond the science alone and goes to man's inhumanity to his fellow man.
SEPP Amplification. In last week's TWTW there appeared a few words on the confusion of the role of clouds in climate science. Professor Dick Lindzen kindly provided to us a short comment that underscores the complexity of the issue.
Just for the record, the problem with clouds is that they can vary for reasons other than surface temperature, and, when they do, they cause temperature changes. However, they can also function as feedbacks to temperature. The real problem is disentangling these things in the data.
SEPP SCIENCE EDITORIAL #17-2010 (May 29, 2010)
By S. Fred Singer, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project
An Open Letter to Prof Edward Acton, Vice Chancellor, University of East Anglia, UK
Dear Prof. Acton
After careful study, I have reached the conclusion that the CRU temperature trends published by Prof. Phil Jones of UEA (and used by the IPCC) are spurious and should be corrected. Instead of the major warming that's been claimed between 1979 and 1996 (the crucial period), the actual warming seems to be minor or even close to zero.
This matter is of extreme importance since international policies concerning climate change are based on the Jones analysis -and equivalent analyses in the US.
I base my conclusion on the following evidence:
**Weather satellites are the most reliable source of global temperature observations, with all data analysis and corrections fully transparent. They show essentially a zero rise in atmospheric temperatures during most of the crucial period (1979-1996). And basic atmospheric physics tells us that the temperature trends at the earth's surface must be less, roughly only half of the atmospheric trends.
**Furthermore, all proxy data I have seen show no significant temperature rise during this same period. Recall that Michael Mann's multi-proxy analysis suddenly stops in 1979.
As a scientist, I am mainly concerned with the truth of the data and the consequences for future climate change. Of course, as a member of the public, I cannot ignore the policy consequences - nor should any citizen/voter.
It seems to me that it is your responsibility to investigate whether and to what extent Dr. Jones' judgment in the selection and in the correction of the raw data was influenced by any desire to see a particular outcome - namely, a strong warming.
In other words, the selection process (i.e., which data to use and which to reject) involved setting explicit or implicit criteria, based on "judgment." Similarly, deciding on the type and degree of correction (for example, for urban heat island effects or other kinds of contamination) involved setting certain criteria based on the judgment of the analyst.
[Analysts can make different choices in the complex process of choosing input data, adjusting raw station data for known inhomogeneities (such as urbanization effects, changes in instrumentation, site location, and observation time), and gridding procedures.]
On this matter, I confess to certain sympathies for Dr Jones, who has devoted his lifetime career to this important task. Yet the search for scientific truth must be paramount.
I hope you will enlist credible experts to help you and I wish you much success as you undertake this daunting task.
S. Fred Singer
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia
Former Director of the US Weather Satellite Service
Fred Singer's Letter to the Editor of the Washington Times
(published on-line May 28, 2010)
2. Response to Washington Post Editorial Insisting on Passing Kerry-Lieberman Cap and Tax.
By Donna Bethell, SEPP Director, May 21, 2010
By Gerald Warner, Telegraph, UK May 28, 2010
IBD Editorial, May 27, 2010
5. This and That On Climate
By Rudy Baum, Editor in Chief, Chemical & Engineering News, May 17, 2010 [H/t Andrew Kaldor]
6. Vaccines' Safety Confirmed, Wakefield's Validity Denied
By Curtis Porter, American Council on Science and Health, May 26, 2010
By Charles Krauthammer, IBD, May 27 2010
NEWS YOU CAN USE:
Defending the Orthodoxy
By Ben Webster, The Times, May 26, 2010 [H/t Bob Kay]
EurActiv.com, May 26, 2010 [H/t CCNet]
[SEPP Comment: Perhaps unlike 1914 - 1918, Paris and Berlin have learned that governments can demand only so much from their citizens.]
Challenging the Orthodoxy
From GWPF, May 25, 2010 [H/t Tom Sheehan]
[SEPP Comment: It is not only the science, but also man's inhumanity to his fellow man.]
Army of Light and Truth 135, Forces of Darkness 110
SPPI, Org, May 24, 2010
By Ben Webster, Times Online, May 29, 2010
By Bob Carter, Quadrant Online, May 23, 2010
PA Making the Move - Or Not
Avoiding the slick spots: Agency more adept at blowing hot air
By Steve Milloy, Washington Times, May 27, 2010
By Steve Milloy, Washington Times, May 27, 2010
BP and the Climategate Inquiry
By Steve McIntyre, Climate Audit, May 21, 2010
Climate Fears Turn to Doubts Among Britons
By Elisabeth Rosenthal, NYT, May 24, 2010
[SEPP Comment: Six months after ClimateGate broke, the New York Times breaks the news to its readers.]
Climategate and the Scientific Elite: Climategate starkly revealed to the public how many global-warming scientists speak and act like politicians.
Iain Murray, National Review Online, May 26, 2010
Don't sweat it
Development and public-health initiatives will matter much more to malaria than the climate will
May 19th 2010 | From The Economist online [H/t Charles Shafer]
[SEPP Comment: Another fear gone bad.]
NASA accused of 'Climategate' stalling: FOIA response long overdue
By Stephen Dinan, Washington Times, May 26, 2010
Consequences from BP's Oil Leak
Obama cancels Gulf drilling projects
By Kara Rowland, Washington Times, May 27, 2010
Other Energy Issues
UPI, May 21, 2010 [H/t Toshio Fujita]
Wind Integrated Realities: The Bentek Study for Texas (Part IV)
By Kent Hawkins, Master Resource, May 26, 2010
[SEPP Comment: The final of a four part series covering the Netherlands, Colorado, and Texas on the issue if substituting wind for fossil fuel actually reduces carbon dioxide emissions.]
Green Jobs for Prosperity
Opinion, WSJ, May 25, 2010
Cash 'Black Hole' Threatens Scots Low-Carbon Economy
By Jenny Fyall, The Scotsman, May 25, 2010 [H/t CCNet]
[SEPP Comment: Banks don't have the money to lend for high risk green jobs.]
Ideas to Improve the System
Drilling for Certainty
By David Brooks, NYT, May 27, 2010
[SEPP Comment: Well reasoned op-ed on the need to deal with potentially catastrophic events in a complex technical society.]
By David Schnare, Master Resource, May 18, 2010
[SEPP Comment: NIPCC *is* Team-B]
Thomas Fuller, Washington Examiner, May 27, 2010
By Christopher Horner, Richmond Times Dispatch, May 23, 2010
By Sindya Bhanoo, NYT, May 28, 2010
By Rosalind Helderman, Washington Post, May 28, 2010 [H/t Conrad Potemra]
Miscellaneous Topic of Possible Interest
By Robert Lee Hotz, WSJ, May 29, 2010 [H/t ICECAP]
Also at: http://www.icecap.us/ (in case you cannot open the above URL)
[SEPP Comment: Efforts to meticulously extract ice cores in Antarctica for new studies.]
El Nino 2009/10 Over - La Nina Coming
Joseph D'Aleo, ICECAP, May 23, 2010
Musings on the 2010 Hurricane Season
By Joseph D'Aleo, ICECAP, May 28, 2010
[SEPP Comment: With the Atlantic in a warm mode, the northeast may be hit by a major storm]
By Adam Voiland, NASA, May 5, 2010 [H/t Toshio Fujita]
BELOW THE BOTTOM LINE:
By Jason Groves, Daily Mail, May 26, 2010 [H/t Malcolm Ross]
By Chris Horner, Pajamas Media, May 24, 2010
By Matt Walker, BBC, May 25, 2010
[SEPP Comment: Creationism science - even the IPCC admits that northern part of the Northern Hemisphere was hotter 5,000 years ago than today. Thus, the bears must have been created since then.]