Bravo! Aussie Gov’t has slashed funding to a key UN environment agency by more than 80‰, stunning environmental groups ahead of UN climate summit in Peru’

Result! Coalition slashes funds to UN climate scroungers

It’s a drop in the ocean, to be sure, but at least it is in the right direction. The ABC, naturally, is inconsolable: The Federal Government has slashed funding to a key United Nations environment agency by more than 80 per cent, stunning environmental groups ahead of a global climate change summit in Peru. The […]

— gReader Pro…

Michigan ski area opens with record snow

Michigan ski area opens with record snow

WAKEFIELD — Indianhead Mountain opened to skiing on Friday after record snowfall has fallen this year. “Indianhead will be able to offer some of the best early season skiing in years,” said Indianhead general manager Barry Bolich. “It was a really good day for November. We’re lucky to be skiing in November,” Romana Martin said. “A great Thanksgiving break here.” Many other skiers agreed, saying it was cold, but conditions otherwise were great. Thanks to Clay Olson for this link

— gReader Pro…

Climatologist Dr. Judith Curry: ‘The legacy of Climategate: 5 years later’

The legacy of Climategate: 5 years later

by Judith Curry Every year at Thanksgiving, I am reminded of Climategate. Over the Thanksgiving holiday in 2009, in the midst of extensive email discussions with Andy Revkin and Joe Romm (!), I penned my essay An open letter to graduate students and young scientists in fields related to climate research. Which followed my essay (published at Climate Audit) On the credibility of climate research. In February 2010, I wrote an article Towards rebuilding trust. The main themes of my writings were concerns about: lack of transparency – need to make data and documentation publicly available tribalism among scientists and circling the wagons strategy: attacking skeptics with ad hominem attacks, appeal to motive attacks, isolating skeptics through lack of access to data, manipulation of the peer review process to reject skeptic papers the need for improved analysis and communication of uncertainty Seems like motherhood and apple pie issues? Well maybe from the perspective of 2014. But in 2009/2010, this was heresy. One of the story lines from Climategate became me, and my engagement with skeptics: Discover Magazine: The big battle over climate science (profile of JC and Mann) April 2010 Scientific American: Climate Heretic: Judith Curry Turns on her Colleagues (Nov 2010) So, what are we to make of all this 5 years later? The ‘establishment’ has maintained that Climategate was overhyped and irrelevant, and that the various enquiries have exonerated the scientists and the science. On the other hand, skeptics find Climategate to have been highly significant (found the inquiries to be bogus), and still discuss it. There have been several interesting scholarly articles written on Climategate, including: Reiner Grundman: Legacy of Climategate Mike Hulme: After Climategate . . . Never the Same? Leiserowitz et al.: Legacy of Climategate 5 years later – meta issues So, what has changed in the past 5 years and can any of it be attributed to Climategate? Transparency has improved substantially. Journals and funding agencies now expect data to be made publicly available, along with metadata. The code for most climate models is now publicly available. As far as I know, there are no outstanding FOIA requests for data (other than possibly some of Mann’s HS data and documentation). Climategate shed a public light on the lack of transparency in climate science, which was deemed intolerable by pretty much everyone (except for some people who …

Global Warming Claim: Airplanes Won’t Fly in 50 Years

Share on Facebook 117 160 SHARES

The hunt for Manbearpig continues. Amusing Alarmist predictions have ranged from the apocalyptic to the bizarre, but the latest is downright idiotic. According to a couple of scientists from Columbia University, air travel might be relegated to the trash bin of history in the future because of the supposed global warming that is occurring today. According to

The two scientists, Coffel and Horton, looked at a phenomenon known amongst pilots as ‘density altitude’, which affects a plane’s ability to take off. Essentially, on hotter days the air is less dense, making it harder to get a plane airborne.

Okay… So warm air makes it tougher for planes to take flight. (I’m sure you can see where this is going.)

Commercial aviation overcomes the problem by issuing weight restrictions at the airport on particularly hot days. Coffel and Horton sought to predict how many more weight restricted days there will be by 2050-2070, and decided, through use of [climate] models, that the “number of weight restriction days between May and September will increase by 50-200 percent at four major airports in the United States by 2050-2070,” and that “these performance reductions may have a negative economic effect on the airline industry.”

So, according to a couple of computer models that these scientists worked up (because, clearly, computer models can never be questioned), hotter temperatures in the future will adversely impact the ability for airplanes to takeoff… Thus putting substantial strains on the industry.

Intellectual honesty must not be a prerequisite for becoming a professor at Columbia.…