And in other news, the sun is hot, ice is cold, and Tano’s wrong.

It’s almost always the case, that when someone says they have an announcement that will blow your mind or something, it’s almost always extremely underwhelming. I keep thinking of the big Big-Foot thing a few years ago, where two guys held this BIG scheduled news conference, which, because it was schedule, got some coverage, and they were going to reveal stunning evidence that they had indeed found a real Big-Foot carcass. The to-do turned out not to reveal much of anything, just a new address for a new Big-Foot Hunters website they launched.

And the Big-Foot carcass….. just a large Big-Foot Halloween costume laid out in a big freezer.

http://youhavetobethistalltogoonthisride.blogspot.com/2009/12/hide-decline-climategate-parody.html

Since we taxpayers are on the hook for all this “research”, all the data and the software used to examine it should be public domain.

If there is a real case for AGW (ACC?) then full disclosure should support the case.

Just a question for the true believers: exactly what period in the earth’s past would you select as the “correct” climate? And once you’ve selected this timespan, how would you show that IT wasn’t an anomaly?

Former NASA scientist, Roy Spencer, makes a case for a high degree of futility apparent in previous attempts to estimate cloud feedbacks in the climate system. He says. “unless we can measure cloud feedbacks in nature, we can not test the feedbacks operating in computerized climate models.” In other words, it is not possible (at least not yet) to measure cloud feedbacks because the two directions of causation are intermingled in nature.

In light of these and other recent revelations its no wonder Al Gore is making himself absent at Copenhagen next week.

Best wishes,
-MFS

As for Charles Johnson: What happened? I mean, we know what happened to Sullivan. (Progressive loss of his reasoning powers, possibly due to long-term use of AIDS drugs including marijuana, his desire to be approved by the leftist(s) he sleeps with, and so forth… plus 2/24/04, the date that Bush proposed a Federal Marriage Amendment.) Now it looks more and more like Chuck is becoming as kooky and intellectually dishonest. What’s in play with him?

http://youhavetobethistalltogoonthisride.blogspot.com/2009/12/rep-thaddeus-mccotter-weighs-in-on.html

The MET now says the previous statements about the re-do were taken out of context – It WILL NOT be re-examining the data. They do say however the will release all data, code, and documentation* to the public within a three year period. I would have preferred the former, but this, if indeed they are good on their word, is a very good step in the right direction.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/12/understanding_climategates_hid.html

It would appear that the complicated scientific modeling was little more than a Tinker Toy construct.

Even in the mid-80′s, the field was filled with Jacobins – to a man, the scientists coming up were the folks who got their degrees solely to stay out of Vietnam. Remember that when you hear about how liberal the current crop of scientists are!

Anyway, I recall interning on a small research vessel taking and logging core samples from the Hudson River bed when I noticed that the results were unexpectedly favorable. Trace chemicals were way down and I asked the lead researcher about it.

“Oh, we can’t tell people that the Hudson is safe to swim in or else they’ll jump back in and ruin it again.”

My younger self completely bought this line of liberal paternalism. How clever, I thought.

The icing on the cake? The research body I worked for was in on the East Anglia email dump.

Christmas comes early, I say!

Best wishes,
-MFS

Yes to the technological solutions. But to go one better, if you’re going to put reflectors up there, why not put up panels instead and find a way to TAP that energy?

The refusal to embrace technology as the solution was what made me smell a rat.