Monday, March 10, 2014

Senate Mid-Term All Nighter on Climate Change


The Senate all nighter on climate change can be viewed at CSPAN.  The birdies can tweet at #Up4Climate

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

anon n+1

http://twitchy.com/2014/03/11/up-for-a-laugh-up4climate-senate-sleepover-inspires-mockery/

J Bowers said...

Good to see some politicians have consciences. Of course, those in the pockets of the fossil fuel lobby and proto-fascist authoritarians (Tea Party) are mocking, but then they weren't ever any good at actually doing something, but very good at shirking responsibility and doing very little.

a_ray_in_dilbert_space said...

We can safely assume n=-1, as Anon n+1 is a zero.

Anonymous said...

I'm glad they agreed to have this at night when they wouldn't bother anyone.

J Bowers said...

After you've been put to bed? Bless.

Russell Seitz said...

Not quite as soporific as the National Stockpile statistics in The Congressional Record , but close. I lasted for 16 minutes before switching to Episode II of The History of Canada on You Tube.

Positively ripping !

EliRabett said...

Russell, try junior year thermo or even better pde. There were no barn burners, but what Eli saw was both correct and relevant.

This was not aimed at me and thee.

Russell Seitz said...

But Eli, I adore the Record!

How else can concerned citizens keep up with the tonnage of FEMA's opium and chinese duck feather reserves, or the state of the turf wars between the stockpile's competing Columbium and Niobium desks ?

Anonymous said...

anon n+1

“Beyond exercises in faith and identity politics, the Democratic all-nighter should be understood as a very odd fundraiser. Most fundraisers feature one or two politicians speaking to dozens of donors. Monday night featured a dozen politicians speaking to one donor: Energy billionaire Tom Steyer.”

Hank Roberts said...

See also: Distinguishing Climate Skeptics and Deniers.

a_ray_in_dilbert_space said...

Anon Zero doesn't even post the sources for his talking points any more. Careful, Zero. Tim Carney might take umbrage at being quoted without attribution.

J Bowers said...

If anyone's wondering were anon+1 got his bollocks of a quote from, it's the Washington Examiner. Yes, Tim Carney bangs on about environmentalism as a religion, blah, bone idle polemic, change the record. No wonder anon didn't link to it.

Russell Seitz said...

I read Carney the riot act in person in 2008.
whereupon his then current employe , the WSJ , stopped publishing my articles and book reviews.

E. Swanson said...

The Congressional Record has the all night Climate Change session up for readers (PDF Warning). It's much faster to skim/read the proceedings compared to watching a video...

E. Swanson said...

In my previous post regarding the all nighter, I missed the first batch of speeches. They were listed as Morning Business, which fooled me. there was an even earlier reference, which recorded a presentation by Senator Sessions from Alabama. Sen. Sessions includes a graph showing a comparison of "actual temperature measurements" with model results. That chart, which can be seen at time point 0:23:40 (4:23PM) into the C SPAN video, appears to be one from Roy Spencer, which is similar to one Spencer presented in his Senate testimony back in July of 2013. Back then, Spencer showed the MSU MT data series from 20S to 20N, claiming that these data proved there was no warming.

Of course this would be the expected result from the MT, since the MSU channel 2 data is contaminated with emissions from the stratosphere and the stratosphere has long been known to exhibit a strong cooling trend in the satellite data, such as found in Channel 4. McNider and Christy presented a similar MT graph in an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal on 19 February. This latest graph from Spencer looks like a later version which appears to use the TLT data and the plot of the average model results is shifted upwards, just as McNider and Christy did for their WSJ commentary. These graphs use a 5 year smoothing, which adds a 2 1/2 year phase shift to the data, thus the endpoint at 2013 should actually be placed at 2010.5.

I think that Spencer, Christy and McNider know full well that presenting these charts is intended to deceive the viewer. The presentation in the WSJ is especially troubling, as this is a major source for financial information for the investing public and was timed to appear just before the Supreme Court was to hear a case about Climate Change, thus these efforts could be considered fraud.

Anonymous said...

E. Swanson (or others), I often come across those charts (models vs 'actual') in discussions with 'sceptics' and would be grateful for a bit more information on the nature of the deceit being played. Is there a good write-up of this subject somewhere?
--
Geoff Harris