NC Media Watch

A letter to Congress

Russ Steele

This a draft letter I am composing on a global warming science issue for my Congressman. The UN IPCC ARs have been used by state and federal legislators to craft greenhouse gas legislation. Legislation that will cost us all at the pump, in our energy bills and, eventually the robustness of our whole family budget if we continue to allow junk science as legislation justification.

Feel free to copy this draft and modify it for your own use.

Dear Congressman Doolittle

You may not be aware that climate science reports, for inclusion in the Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), are tainted by their failure to pass peer review, as required by UN policy. The IPCC Third Assessment Report (AR3) was used to justify policies regarding the control of greenhouse gasses in multiple states.  Allowing non-peer reviewed material in the next assessment, AR4, is paramount to letting junk science establish national policy on climate change.

I would like to bring to your attention a paper by Eugene R. Wahl and Caspar M. Amman, which was accepted by Climatic Change and submitted for inclusion in AR4. This paper is highly dependent on citations from a paper which was rejected for publication in Geophysical Research Letters, a peer reviewed journal. Details can be found on Climate Audit.

I am writing to request that your staff investigate this matter and thus bring their findings to the attention of the appropriate Congressional Committees.  Both Congressman Bolton and Boehlert have shown an interest in how junk science could be used to set national global warming policy. In fact, Congressman Boehlert asked the National Academy of Sciences to empanel a committee to study "Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Past 1,000-2,000 Years.” This panel is currently examining questionable science used in AR3, most notably the “hockey stick” which has become the icon for global warming. 

It is vital that all climate science used to make public policy be audited.  We cannot afford to have junk science used to taint government-sponsored scientific research and resulting policy. Auditing is essential to maintain the highest level of integrity in federally-supported science, so Congress can make the best decisions for all Americans.

Sincerely,

Russell Steele

The Sun is More Active Now than Over the Last 8000 Years

Russ Steele

This is from a 2004 press release from the Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science in Germany.

The research team had already in 2003 found evidence that the Sun is more active now than in the previous 1000 years. A new data set has allowed them to extend the length of the studied period oftime to 11,400 years, so that the whole length of time since the last ice age could be covered. This study showed that the current episode of high solar activity since about the year 1940 is unique within the last 8000 years. This means that the Sun has produced more sunspots, but also more flares and eruptions, which eject huge gas clouds into space, than in the past. The origin and energy source of all these phenomena is the Sun's magnetic field.

If you look at the graphic below, it looks a lot like graphs the "warmer's" are pushing to prove increases in CO2 is responsible for warming.  However, in this case man can do little to stop the warming, thus exempt us from the social and economic engineering  demanded by the environmentalist.  That is not good new for the warmers.

Click for larger image

Fig. 2: Top: Reconstructed sunspot activity (10 year average) for the last 11,400 years based on C-14 data (blue curve) and the directly observed historical sunspot data since 1610 (red curve). The reliable C-14 data ends around the year 1900 so that the sharp increase in sunspot activity in the 20th century does not appear in the graph. The reconstruction shows clearly that a comparable period of high sunspot activity previously existed over 8000 years ago. Below: An enlarged section of the upper graph (hatched area) with several episodes of higher sun activity; comparable to the 20th century.

Perusing the Sierra Citizen

Russ Steele

While I was at Hoover’s vets appointment, I found a stack of Sierra Citizens, the Spring Edition, on the counter.  With nothing else to read while waiting for Hoover’s lab results, I started perusing the “Voice of the Wild Sierra,” published by the South Yuba River Citizens League.  I was unaware that SYRCL was into Peak Oil and Global Warming issues, but I could have guessed that SYRCL being a liberal organization, they might also champion other environmental causes.

On the front page I found Life after Oil, by Tim Holt. Holt paints a dim future of soaring gas prices, an end to long distance food distribution, no more Targets, no more Wal Marts, and the need for local farmers to feed us all.  Grow it local, or go hungry is Holt’s message.  But, in evaluating Nevada County’s agricultural potential, he points to Nevada County has a short growing season and poor soils. 

Inside, Peter Van Zant in the President’s Message, indicates that SYRCL’s concern about global warming will soon be raising to the top of  their project list.

Now I am confused. If Tim Holt is right, it seems to me that Nevada County would benefit from some global warming in a post oil world. Our growing season would be longer, we would need less energy to heat our homes, or our post oil economy hillside dugouts. On the other hand as the price of oil shoots through the roof we will be driving less, we will be produce far less greenhouse gas, which will reduce the warming and create a much colder world. It seem to me we would be better off in a global warming world, than a cooling one, because shortly after the oil is gone, so will the trees, and then the coal. Oh, wait we will not longer have a long distance transportation system to bring us coal. Does Nevada County have any local coal deposits?   

I am looking forward to the SYCRL’s global warming and oil consumption reduction programs, as they are now truly local problems worth my attention.

Ugly facts get in way of global warming hysteria

Russ Steele

The Junkman has posted a few things that all the warmers and their friends should consider before making their next hysterical pronouncement: 

    •    the temperature effect of atmospheric carbon dioxide is logarithmic, not exponential
    •    the potential planetary warming from a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide from pre-Industrial Revolution levels of ~280ppmv to 560ppmv (possible some time later this century - perhaps) is estimated at less than 1 °C
    •    the guesses of significantly larger warming are dependent on "feedback" (supplementary) mechanisms whose existence is uncertain and the cumulative sign of which is unknown (they may add to warming from increased atmospheric carbon dioxide or, equally likely, might suppress it)
    •    the total warming since measurements have been attempted is thought to be about six-tenths of one degree
    •    at least half of the estimated temperature increment occurred prior to significant change in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels
    •    assuming the unlikely case that all the natural drivers of planetary temperature change ceased to operate at the time of measured atmospheric change then +30% increment in atmospheric carbon dioxide caused about one-third of one degree temperature increment since and thus provides empirical support for less than one degree increment due to a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide
    •    there is no linear relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide change and global mean temperature or global mean temperature trend - global mean temperature has both risen and fallen during the period atmospheric carbon dioxide has been rising
    •    the natural world has tolerated more than one-degree fluctuations in mean temperature during the current interglacial and thus current changes are within the range of natural variation
    •    other anthropogenic effects are vastly more important, at least on local and regional scales
    •    fixation on atmospheric carbon dioxide is a distraction from these more important anthropogenic effects
    •    despite attempts to label atmospheric carbon dioxide a "pollutant" it is, in fact, an essential trace gas, the increasing abundance of which is a bonus to the bulk of the biosphere
    •    there is no reason to believe that slightly lower temperatures are somehow preferable to slightly higher temperatures - there is no known "optimal" nor any known means of knowingly and predictably adjusting some sort of planetary thermostat
    •    fluctuations in atmospheric carbon dioxide are of little relevance in the short to medium term (although should levels fall too low it could prove problematic in the longer-term)
    •    activists and zealots constantly shrilling over atmospheric carbon dioxide are misdirecting attention and effort from real and potentially addressable local, regional and planetary problems

The whole story is here.

City Council displays long delayed leadership

Russ Steele

Trina Kleist writes Traffic Changes OK'd, March 29, 2006

She has some good news for the business community, the local economy can move forward, under the common sense guidance of the City Council.

Work on a roundabout for a major Grass Valley intersection will move ahead after City Council members approved a funding plan for it late Tuesday.

I had planned to attend the meeting and give a first hand report, or at least watch it on TV, but Caitlin our daughter living in Massachusetts gave us a surprise visit when we returned from Hawaii. Visiting with her has a higher priority than sitting through a City Council meeting.

However, I want to follow up as the City Council has demonstrated great  common sense and true leadership in moving forward with a viable solution.   An e-mail from a blog reader reported that many business leaders spoke in favor of action by the Council.  This positive action by the business community should be applauded, supported, and rewarded.  The reader also noted the failed effort of the no-growthers to block any action on the proposal.  The stasis crowd failed, but we can expect another challenge when the funding vote is on the agenda at the City Council and the Transportation Commission?         

As a Transportation Commissioner I am interested in how the City  Planners will structures the fee program for the Idaho Maryland/East Main intersection, which is currently under funded. I am not ready to go down the slippery slope of making exceptions. Once you set the precedent, everyone will want special treatment. I will keep an open mind, but want a fair and even application of the fee program. The Commission is currently working on an update to the mitigation fee program and needs time to insure it is fairly applied to across all contributors to traffic congestion.

Stay tuned!

Time over hypes global warming

Russ Steele

By now you may have read the Time global warming hype, or read newspaper accounts of the articles, or seen TV reports, based on four papers published in Science.  As I have pointed out before these papers are based on computer models.  Models which are unable to replicate the last 200 years of climate change. So, it they can not shed light on the last 200, how can they tell us much about 130,000 years ago?  To help us get past the hype the folks at CO2 Science, Sherwood, Keith and Craig Idso,  have compiled a list of peer reviewed scientific papers with some real facts in:

Highly Over-Hyped: Greenland's and Antarctica's Impacts on Sea Level

If you take the time to read sumaries of these papers you will find that temperatures in Greenland were much higher in the 1930s than they are now. And in the 1930s, those pesky greenhouse gases we not a problem yet.  Please read the summaries and draw your own conclusions, based on data and not computer models and magazine hype.

The Idso’s conclude:

In light of these facts, it is clear there is a serious disconnect between reality and the virtual world of climate modeling; and since everything else in the 24 March 2006 set of glacial ice Science papers pertains to climate modeling, there is not much else that need be said about them ... except, perhaps, to note that the modeling pertains primarily to the prior interglacial, which makes it essentially meaningless for two additional reasons. First, if the models can't replicate what happened in earth's polar regions over the past few decades, there's surely no reason to give any credence to what they tell us about something that occurred 130,000 years ago. And second, one can easily get the right answer to a computational problem for any number of compensating wrong reasons, so that even a "correct" replication does not imply that the mechanics of the modeled phenomenon are correctly understood.

Game Over? -- The tipping point is near

Russ Steele

I am getting way behind on my global warming posts just when science writer are predicting the global warming tipping point for public opinion is near.  Some are claiming the public has reached the point where science no longer maters. Only what we see all around us, decaying, glaciers, early spring tornados, and fall hurricane destruction matters.  Once the tipping point has been reached, and polls have confirm human caused global warming, they should start dismantling the global economy.  After all if humans developed the carbon burning global economy they should be responsible for fixing the problem.  The simple solution promoted by the “global warmers” is to stop producing CO2, even though there is no positive proof that CO2 increases are driving the rise in global temperatures.  Remember science does not count, only feelings.

The only proof offered so far are simple computer models of a process so complex, with so many feedback mechanisms, that it is impossible to model with our limit computing capacity. To compensate for this complexity, scientist use less complex models that can be tweaked to get the desired results. The science writers do not question extraordinary claims by scientists for rapidly melting glaciers, thinning ice caps, oceans rising at 50 times the current rate, or climate stability for over a 1,000 years.  Why should they, it would only raise doubts about the public’s mind, delaying the tipping point they are so diligently promoting. 

Now, with the Time global warming scare story on the cover, and New Scientist defense of the Hockey Stick, both widely covered in newspaper stories and on the Internet, we may have finally reached the point where the public no longer has to worry about those pesky global warming skeptics, the unproved CO2 science, and just go with the polls. Once the public tipping point has been reached -- Game Over!

Planned Color In My Back Yard?

George Rebane

Jeff Ackerman’s 21mar06 editorial ‘County’s Growth Reflects White-flight Trend’ in The Union may have to be cited for introducing PCIMBY into our long-suffering lexicon.  The column drew over thirty mostly vitriolic comments.  I was a bit surprised because the piece presented a pretty even-handed commentary on Nevada County growth; and then near the end came the line that, I believe, launched the comment armada.  All that even-handedness that had the reader agreeing with Jeff through most of his column suddenly crashed into “The only question is how we ought to grow.  In determining that, we ought to make sure we have a plan to add a little color to our pale complexion.”   There it was pure and simple, PCIMBY - another proposal for blatant left-wing social engineering?

At this point I’m not sure what all Jeff wants in that PCIMBY plan to fix our community’s complexion and how he sees the plan implemented.  But at least I could understand the temperature level of the responses.  For my part, I intend to be with the first committee at the Bear River bridge to welcome any folks coming into my backyard who share my mores and values no matter what complexion they happen to be sporting.  But along with most others here, I want these folks to come with the same aspirations and qualifications that their forebears had as they made it up Hwy 49, and definitely not because of some PCIMBY plan that put in place special dispensations to attract folks based on their complexion.  This may sound like racism to those for whom PCIMBY stands for Politically Correct In My Back Yard, but that’s simply a misunderstanding that a more careful reading of what I said should clear up.

For many years I have watched the state’s successful assault on personal freedoms and it always makes me come back to the same question.  Under what conditions is it still possible in these United States for a group of free and like-minded citizens to live together as they want, welcoming only those into their midst who share their values and mores?  The reply ‘under any conditions that don’t violate the law’ is no longer a usable answer because the common denominator of the laws that prohibit such life involves the transfer of state funds and resources essential for our modern world.  And since the state now takes so much from us taxpayers and in return ties our lives to the conditions under which it ‘gives’ back, the answer to the question may well be that a diversity of like-minded communities can no longer exist in this country.  When any such place (Nevada County?) is detected, its like-mindedness can be legally and physically destroyed by any number of unlike-minded people/groups bringing suit.  The result, of course, is that the changed community now will reflect the values and mores of PCIMBY-minded people.  If this is really the case, then the prescription for an externally enforced PCIMBY plan for Nevada County is just a matter of time.

After going on about all this I have to admit that I may well be mistaken about what Jeff meant by his “plan to add a little color to our pale complexion.”  Jeff and his editor Pat Butler are both professionals and honorable men.  To the benefit of the community, Pat has already given ample evidence of his political leanings.  I thought that so had Jeff, but reading his editorial makes me think that I might have jumped to an unwarranted conclusion.  Nevertheless, I have no doubt that Jeff will, in the fullness of time, make clear his thoughts on the matter and let us all know where the guys with the biggest ink pot and loudest trumpet in the county stand.

Coming home

Russ Steele

Today is a travel day, returning to California’s cold and rain. On past visits to Hawaii the weather in Nevada County was nice, and we often wondered if visiting warm places was more fun when the weather was home is cold and rainy.  It’s not.  This has been our wettest trip to Hawaii, even though we are staying on the dry side of the island.  Even the locals are beginning to wonder about the cool rainy weather. 

Looking for more local bloggers

Russ Steele

Some snarky comments on bloggers by the Union.

Pat Butler: Comment policy leads to charges of censorship, March 25, 2006

But before you go out on your own you might want to contact local bloggers if you can find them. One place you might look is on our Web site where they like to solicit traffic. One warning to bloggers: We have to check your blogs before we will consider posting your address and that might take some time.

Our favorite comments are the ones that address local issues, which means when we're scanning a long list those are the one's we look at first.

Before I comment, let me share something Glenn Reynolds a highly regarded blogger wrote about newspapers and blogging at TCS Daily, titled “Newspapers in Trouble”. Glenn lists four things newspapers should consider. I listed number three in an earlier post.

Here is number four, which is relevant to Pat’s comment on bloggers.

Fourth, I'd get readers involved. I'd incorporate readers and bloggers into the reporting, fact-checking, and revision of news stories. I'd be generous about handing out credit, too -- people will do a lot for a little bit of ego gratification. With digital cameras, cameraphones, etc., all over, there's usually somebody on the scene when something happens. I'd take advantage of that. I'd also take advantage of readers with special expertise in particular areas -- in fact, I'd build a roster of those people and use them as color commentators on stories in their areas. If union rules interfered, well, see above.

I sent a link for this article to Pat and Jeff, but they did not respond in anyway.  There is a perception at the Union that responding to bloggers gives “them more credit than they deserve.” Does not look like much hope for Glenn’s # Four at The Union, as it could give us more “credit than we deserve.”

I always give courtesy link to any Union article, letter or comment I write about.  It is nice when they allow a link to stay in a comment, but we never see any links or discussion in the Union blogs.  They are still in broadcast mode.

As for Pat comments about seeking out local comments.  I try to only post a link in the Union Comments  when I have something to add, corrected, or attempted to set the record straight. on  a local issue. It is not helpful, if the reviewer at the the Union is slow to approve my link. This in itself could be considered a form of censorship.

One reason for starting NCWatch was the slow response my letters to the editor and other voices columns received by the staff. The issue was long past, when my letters were published, prompting people to ask ”what is he writing about and why”?   

I think we need more bloggers, more people commenting on their own turf, not constrained by The Union editors.  I am giving a two hour course on how to start your own blog at a local Community Computer Group in May. I will be glad to give this course to any other group who is interested in blogging. Or, if you would like a couple of hours of one-on-one instruction call me at 265-8085.   The  more voices we have, the more links we create, the more truth telling there will be. 

As to finding Nevada County Blogs, just go here, or here, and use the advanced search function.

Or, just check out Anna, Sadie, or Bo.  More to come next month, some real thinkers are starting a blog.