Monthly Archives: October 2015

Social Cost Of Carbon–The Administration’s New Way To Justify Regulations


The Obama administration has instituted new criteria for supporting their climate change regulations. It is called the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC).   The eventual cost of an increase in atmospheric CO2 is calculated for each regulation. corncropUnknownThe calculation is based upon their model’s forecasts of temperature, sea level, storms, droughts, etc. All the bad things they believe will happen if the rise of atmospheric CO2 is not stopped. You can be certain that each regulation could prevent millions, perhaps billions, of dollars damage according to their SCC calculation.

The SCC calculations use several discount rates that most rational economist would say were not germane. SSC presumes that the next generations will not have more knowledge and money to adapt to what ever actually happens. For example at the turn of the last century, do you think the forecasters would have come up with airplanes, nuclear energy, penicillin, satellites, for several example of things that have made enormous changes? And the many people that would be lifted out of poverty and provided a much-improved life?

Continue reading

Advertisements

Duke’s Dr. Brown Believes Temperature Records Are Being Deliberately Tampered To Support Man-Made Global Warming Theory


I no longer consider it remotely possible to accept the null hypothesis that the climate record has not been tampered with to increase the warming of the present and cooling of the past and thereby exaggerate warming into a deliberate better fit with the theory instead of letting the data speak for itself and hence be of some use to check the theory.”

Those words are by Dr Robert J Brown of Duke University in a WUWT posting titled “Is There Evidence of Frantic Researchers “Adjusting” Unsuitable Data? (Now Includes July Data)”.

In late May or early June, USHCN announced that the “Pause” was broken as they had found that the sea surface temperatures (sst) were being underreported. They said temperature measuring buoys that they placed in the ocean needed correction and they added 0.12C to those measurements. Never mind that these buoys were equipped with the best temperature measuring devices. But alas they were not giving the answer they needed. So they used ocean going vessels’ water intake measuring devices to correct the buoys. See “NOAA Alleges New Temperature Data Refutes The “Pause But Does It?
Continue reading

92% Of US Surface Temperatures Are Estimated.


Temperature readings from the various temperature-monitoring stations in the USA are sent to the data compilers at the U.S. Historical Climatological Network (USHCN). This data can be called the”raw “data. It has yet to be process through the 6 steps used to “adjust” the raw data. The adjustment process is:

  1. Survey for obvious outliers and the radically incorrect. Delete or correct as necessary.
  2. Time of observation adjustment.
  3. New measuring device adjustment .
  4. Homogenization adjustment to account for failure to record all the data from given monitoring stations and random stations movement.
  5. Lack of monitoring stations in remote areas, for example, where it is necessary to fill in calculated estimates of what the reading would be if there were devices.
  6. Adjustment for the “heat island” effect.

I have tried to summarize the process in the above. For a more detailed description of the process used by USHCN click here. The adjusted raw data is considered the US temperature.

Continue reading