Animavore wrote:Doing the rounds this morning on right-wing papers. I'm taking the Daily Fail here.

How Captain Robert Scott's log book from his expedition of Antarctica more than 100 years ago raises troubling new doubts about global warming

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z4R0yagqKf
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

This is a typical, disgusting example of cherry-picking and quote-mining from Heartland Institute advocate (read; oil shill), Christopher Brooker.

Here's an article simply about what the scientists say without drawing the conclusions that Brooker, who took one piece of info and ran a mile with it, did.

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/20 ... d-in-.html

Climate scientists condemn article claiming global temperatures are falling

A Republican-led panel promoted a misleading tabloid story alleging earth may not be warming, relying on data that leaves out important points of context

Climate scientists have denounced the House committee on science, space and technology after the Republican-held panel promoted a misleading story expressing skepticism that the earth is dangerously warming.

On Thursday afternoon, the committee tweeted a Breitbart article alleging: “Global Temperatures Plunge. Icy Silence from Climate Alarmists”. The story linked to a British tabloid, the Daily Mail, which claimed that global land temperatures were plummeting, and that humans were not responsible for years of steadily increasing heat.

[...]

[Adam] Sobel called the committee’s use of Breitbart “distressing”. “If the House science committee wants to understand science they should talk to climate scientists. [...] For anyone, least of all the House committee on science, to at this particular moment be promoting fake news aimed at fooling the public into thinking otherwise, can only be interpreted as a deliberate effort to distract and fool the public.”

Promoting the articles, [Michael] Mann said, “is beneath the dignity of anyone holding higher office”.

“This is an astounding example of cherry-picking the data,” said Kerry Emanuel, a professor at MIT. “Global land temperatures fluctuate significantly from one month to the next, and the article in question appears to have cherry-picked a drop on global land temperatures (not including the ocean, which covers 70% of the globe) for a single month.”

Emanuel left politics to the committee, adding: “You may draw your own conclusions as to motives.”

Pulsar wrote:New Potholer video:

Sea ice hit record lows in both poles in November
Both the Arctic and Antarctica saw less sea ice this November than at any time on record, ice decreased in the crucial Barents Sea even as winter set in.

ElDiablo wrote:Interesting read in Nature about Judith Curry.

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101101/full/news.2010.577.html

For his part, Mann said climate science would be stronger without Curry. He said she routinely engaged in character attack, "confusionism and denialism" and eroded scientific discussion.

"She has played a particularly pernicious role in the climate change denial campaign, laundering standard denier talking points but appearing to grant them greater authority courtesy of the academic positions she has held and the meager but nonetheless legitimate scientific work that she has published in the past," he said. "Much of what I have seen from her in recent years is boilerplate climate change denial drivel."

Tuesday's hearing on Senator Jeff Sessions to be Attorney General: Climate and Krispy Kreme

On Tuesday, climate change made a momentary appearance during the confirmation hearing of Senator Jeff Sessions (R–AL) to be attorney general. In the past, Sessions has acknowledged that human activity may be warming the planet but has fiercely fought government efforts to curb emissions of warming gases including carbon dioxide and methane. During the hearing, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D–RI) asked Sessions how he would approach “making a decision about the facts of climate change” if a case before the Department of Justice required it.

In response, Sessions said:

“I don't deny that we have global warming. In fact, the theory of it always struck me as plausible, and it's the question of how much is happening and what the reaction would be to it. So, that's what I would hope we could see occur."

Here is the whole exchange, according to an unofficial transcript published by CNN.

WHITEHOUSE: You may be in a position as attorney general to either enforce laws or bring actions that relate to the problem of carbon emissions and the changes that are taking place both physically and chemically in our atmosphere and oceans as a result of the flood of carbon emissions that we've had.

It is the political position of the Republican Party in the Senate, as I have seen it, that this is not a problem, that we don't need to do anything about it, that the facts aren't real, and that we should all do nothing whatsoever. That's the Senate.

You as attorney general of the United States may be asked to make decisions for our nation that require a factual predicate that you determine as the basis for making your decision. In making a decision about the facts of climate change, to whom will you turn? Will you, for instance, trust the military, all of whose branches agree that climate change is a serious problem of real import for them?

Will you trust our national laboratories, all of whom say the same? Will you trust our national science agencies—by the way, NASA is driving a rover around on the surface of mars right now. So, they're [sic] scientists, I think, are pretty good.

I don't think there is a single scientific society, I don't think there is a single credited university, I don't think there is a single nation that denies this basic set of facts.

And, so, if that situation is presented to you and you have to make a decision based on the facts, what can give us any assurance that you will make those facts based on real facts and real science?

SESSIONS: That's a good and fair question, and honesty and integrity in that process is required. And if the facts justify a position on one side or the other on a case, I would try to utilize those facts in an honest and appropriate way.

I've not—I don't deny that we have global warming. In fact, the theory of it always struck me as plausible, and it's the question of how much is happening and what the reaction would be to it. So, that's what I would hope we could see occur.

WHITEHOUSE: Indeed, I'll bet you dollars against those lovely Krispy Kreme donuts we have out back that if you went down to the University of Alabama and if you talked to the people who fish out of mobile, they had already seen the changes in the ocean. They'd be able to measure the PH changes and they'd know the acidification is happening, and there's no actual dispute about that except in the politics of Washington, D.C.

SESSIONS: I recognize the great interest in time and you've committed to the issue and I value your opinion.

WHITEHOUSE: I do come from an ocean state, and we do measure the rise in the sea level and we measure the warming of Narragansett Bay and we measure the change in PH. It's serious for us, Senator. Thank you. My time has expired.

Wyoming Bill Would All But Outlaw Clean Energy by Preventing Utilities From Using It

While many U.S. states have mandates and incentives to get more of their electricity from renewable energy, Republican legislators in Wyoming are proposing to cut the state off from its most abundant, clean resource—wind—and ensuring its continued dependence on coal.

A new measure submitted to the Wyoming legislature this week would forbid utilities from providing any electricity to the state that comes from large-scale wind or solar energy projects by 2019. It's an unprecedented attack on clean energy in Wyoming, and possibly the nation. And it comes at a time when such resources are becoming cheaper and increasingly in demand as the world seeks to transition to clean energy to prevent the worst impacts of climate change.

The bill's nine sponsors, two state senators and seven representatives, largely come from Wyoming's top coal-producing counties and include some deniers of man-made climate change. They filed the bill on Tuesday, the first day of the state's 2017 legislative session. Activists and energy experts are alarmed by the measure, which would levy steep fines on utilities that continue providing (or provide new) "non-eligible" clean energy for the state's electricity. But they are skeptical it will get enough support to become law.