Investment and other financial matters

Archive for September, 2010

Only 330 Jobs In The Tasmanian Forest Removal Industry

Thats right. Only 330 people are engaged in the systematic theft of
Tasmanias mixed-species forests that are spirited out of the country
without ever returning a single cent to the state, the nation or the
economy. The reason the whole economy is taking a MASSIVE hit at the hands
of the Gunns climate clowns is that we pick-up the bill for climate
degradation in floods, droughts and extreme weather events. If you add the
huge bill from Atrazine and Simazine polluted water as well as aerial
insecticide contamination leaving Tasmania with the highest cancer rate in
Australia, its obvious who is the big loser. Your children.

.
posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comment (1)

Re: A Book Tom "chemist" Bolger Should Read.

"Roger Coppock" <rcopp…@adnc.com> wrote in message

news:f8466a2f-9598-4e6b-8f8a-ff2fdfba7394@72g2000hsu.googlegroups.com…

> Tom, you need to learn some basic facts.
> A good book for a non-scientist like yourself is:
> http://forecast.uchicago.edu/
> http://www.amazon.com/Global-Warming-Understanding-David-Archer/dp/14…
> It’s surprising how many of your misconceptions
> are corrected in the first half-a-dozen chapters
> of this widely used basic textbook.

How about some examples.
Not all of us have the time or inclination to wade through the book.

Regards

Bonzo

"CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet’s climate on
long, medium and even short time scales." R. Timothy Patterson,
Professor Of Geology, Director Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center,
Carleton University, Canada

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (4)

When Has The Environment Minister Decided In Favour Of The Environment?

OK, I’m asking our readers to name a single instance where Australias last
2 environment ministers (Turnbull & Garrett) actually made a decision that
favoured the environment. Their decisions ALWAYS put an economic benefit
BEFORE protection of the environment. Usually to please some vested
interest or party donor.
Their decisions always slightly modify some criminal act of negligence to
our ecosystem. For example Turnbull simply reduced the amount of
carcinogenic dioxins Gunns could pour into Bass Straight. They can still
do the ecological crime. If I don’t get any credible examples I’ll start
lobbying for a name-change for Peter Garrett. He will become the ‘Minister
for Environmental Degradation’.

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comment (1)

Global Cooling Relentlessly Marches On

Hey Coppcock, throw away those useless "textbooks" on fake global
warming, and prepare for the imminent global cooling.

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 at 08:50am

If we panicked over rare weather the way warmenists do, we’d figure
global cooling was our new problem:

Snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is
greater than at any time since 1966. According to the NCDC, the average
temperature in January "was -0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th
century) average.".

And remember the Arctic Sea ice? The ice we were told so hysterically
last fall had melted to its "lowest levels on record? … The ice is
back.

Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in
Ottawa, says the Arctic winter has been so severe the ice has not only
recovered, it is actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than at
this time last year.

OK, so one winter does not a climate make. But if environmentalists and
environment reporters can run around shrieking about the manmade
destruction of the natural order every time a robin shows up on Georgian
Bay two weeks early, then it is at least fair game to use this winter’s
weather stories to wonder whether the alarmist are being a tad
premature.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/com…

Regards

Bonzo

". researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Solar Research in Germany
report the sun has been burning more brightly over the last 60 years,
accounting for the 1 degree Celsius increase in Earth’s temperature over
the last 100 years."
http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=287279412587175

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (2)

IF ONLY WE'D LISTENED!

25 Feb 2008

Remember the "secret Pentagon report" on global warming from a few years
back?

The secret report that wasn’t secret?

Here’s one of the report’s predictions, as understood by Britain’s
Observer newspaper:

As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will
create major upheaval for millions.

That was written four years ago – before the Great Upheaval of ’05.
Caused by the rising.

http://timblair.net/

Regards

Bonzo

"CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet’s climate on
long, medium and even short time scales." R. Timothy Patterson,
Professor Of Geology, Director Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center,
Carleton University, Canada

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (2)

ON THE UP SIDE, IT'S NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN!

24 Feb 2008

Australia generates around 1.2 to 1.4 per cent of alleged global
warmening gases.

If Australia cuts its greenhouse emissions by 90 per cent, as the
government’s chief climate change comedian has urged, emissions
planet-wide will be reduced to between 98.73 to 98.92 per cent of
current levels.

Futile and destructive; it’s a perfect green policy. You’d get more
sense from a beedog.

Regards

Bonzo

"Attributing global climate change to human CO2 production is akin to
trying to diagnose an automotive problem by ignoring the engine
(analogous to the Sun in the climate system) and the transmission (water
vapour) and instead focusing entirely, not on one nut on a rear wheel,
which would be analogous to total CO2, but on one thread on that nut,
which represents the human contribution." Dr. Timothy Ball, Chairman of
the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP.com), Former Professor
Of Climatology, University of Winnipeg

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have No Comments

Disproving the IPCC is so easy, a child could do it

Measuring The Phoenix Urban Heat Island

22 Feb 2008

http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2008/02/measureing-the.html

This is a project my son did for Science Fair to measure the urban heat
island effect in Phoenix.  The project could also be called "Disproving
the IPCC is so easy, a child could do it."

The IPCC claims that the urban heat island effect has a negligible
impact, even on surface temperature stations located within urban areas.

After seeing our data, this claim will be very hard to believe.

In doing the test, we tried to follow as closely as possible the process
used in the Nyuk Hien Wong and Chen Yu study of Singapore as published
in Habitat International, Volume 29, Issue 3 , September 2005, Pages
547-558.  We used a LogTag temperature data logger.  My son used a map
and a watch to mark our times, after synchronizing clocks with the data
logger, so he could match times to get temperature at each location.  I
called out intersections as we passed them and he wrote down the times.
At the same time, I actually had a GPS data logger where I gathered GPS
data for location vs. time, but I did not share this with him because he
wanted to track locations himself on the map.  My data below uses the
GPS data, which was matched with the temperature data in an Excel
spreadsheet using simple Vlookup calls.

To protect the data logger from the 60mph wind  (we tried to drive at
exactly 60 so my son could interpolate distances between intersections)
we put the datalogger in a PVC Tee:

We added some insulation to reduce the effect of heat from the car’s
roof, and then strapped the assembly to the roof with the closed part of
the Tee facing forward (the nose of the car is to the left in this
picture).

We drove transects two nights in a row.  Both nights were cloudless with
winds below 5 mph.  Ideally, we would have driven between midnight and 6
AM, but this was my kid’s science project and he needs to get to bed so
we did it from about 9PM to 11PM.  We were concerned that the air might
still be cooling during the test, such that as we drove out from town,
it might be easy to mix up cooling with time and cooling with location.
Our idea for correcting this was to drive and gather data on an entire
loop, starting in the center of town, going about 30 miles out, and then
returning to the starting point.  That way, with data taken in both
directions, the results could be averaged and the cooling rate would
cancel out.  As it turned out, we didn’t even bother to do the
averaging.  The two trips can be seen in the plots, but the urban heat
island shows through pretty clearly in the data and the slope of the
line between temperature and distance was about the same on the inbound
and outbound legs.

I used the GPS lat/long points to calculate the distance (as the crow
flies) from the center of town (My son did it the hard way, using a tool
on Google maps).

The first night we went north (click to enlarge):

The second night we went south.  The urban profile going south is a
little squirrellier, as the highway we were traveling tends to dip in
and out of the urbanization.

Here is the total route over the two nights.  I’m still trying to figure
out the best way to plot the temperatures on the map (again, click to
enlarge)

You can see the results.  Even at the too-early time of 9-11PM, the
temperature fell pretty linearly by about 0.2-0.3 degrees F per mile
from the city center (as the crow flies).

I would really love to do is to go down to Tucson and run this same test
starting at the USHCN weather station there and driving outwards.  That
may have to wait a few weeks until my job calms down a bit.

Update:  Per some emails I have received, it is theoretically possible
for the urban heat island effect to be real and to have integrity in the
surface temperature record.  The first way this could happen is if the
official measurement stations are well sited and outside of growing
urban heat islands.  I know for a fact by direct observation that this
is not the case.  A second way this might be the case is if one argues
that urban heat islands exist but their effect is static over time, so
that they may bias temperatures but not the warming signal.  I also
don’t think this is very credible, given growth of urban areas over the
last 50 years.

A better argument might be that because most US temperature stations are
arriving at daily temperature averages from just measuring daily min and
max temperatures.  It might be arguable that while urban temperatures
cool more slowly at night, they still reach the same Tmin in the early
morning as the surrounding countryside.  Unfortunately, I do not think
this is the case — studies like this one taken at 5AM have seen the
same results.  But this is something I may pursue later, redoing the
results at whatever time of day Phoenix usually hits its minimum
temperature.

A good argument for the integrity of the surface temperature measurement
system is NOT that scientists blind to local station installation
details can use statistical tools to correct for urban biases.  After
looking at two stations in the Arizona area, one urban (Tucson) and one
rural (Grand Canyon) it appears the GISS statistical method, whatever
this double-secret process may be [insert rant about government-funded
research by government employees being kept secret] it actually tends to
average biased sites with non-biased sites, which does nothing to get
the urban bias out of the measured surface warming signal – it just
spreads it around a little.  It reminds me a lot of my kids spreading
the food they don’t like in a thin layer all over the plate, hoping that
it will be less noticeable than when it sits in one place in a big pile.

Again, I have not inspected their procedure, but looking at the results
there seems to be a built-in assumption in the GISS algorithms that they
expect an equal chance of a site being biased upwards vs. downwards.  In
fact, I seem to see more GISS corrections fixing imagined downwards
biases than upwards biases.  I just don’t see how this is a valid
assumption.  The reality is that biases in outdoor temperature
measurement are much more likely to be upwards than downwards,
particularly over the last 50 years of urbanization and even more
particularly given the fact that the preferred measuremnt technology,
the MMTS station, has a very very short cable length that nearly
gaurantees an installation near buildings, pavement, etc.

Update #2:  To this last point, consider this situation:  Thermometer
one in the city shows 2 degrees of warming.  Thermometer two a few
hundred kilometers away shows no warming.  Someone aware of urban biases
without a dog in the hunt would, without other data to guide them,
likely put their money on the rural site being correct and the urban
site exaggerated or biased.  The urban site should be thrown out, not
averaged in.  However, the folks putting the GISS numbers together are
strong global warming believers.  They EXPECT to find warming, so when
looking at the same situation, absolutely sure in their hearts there
should be warming, the site with the 2 degrees of warming looks correct
to them and the no warming site looks anomalous.  It is for this reason
that the GISS methodology should be as public as possible, subject to
full criticism by everyone.

Regards

Bonzo

"The notion of a static, unchanging climate is foreign to the history of
the earth or any other planet with a fluid envelope. The fact that the
developed world went into hysterics over changes in global mean
temperature of a few tenths of a degree will astound future
 generations." Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member
of the National Academy of Sciences

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (4)

Eminent Climate Modellers Admit Models Are Wrong

According to Robert Toggweiler of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics
Laboratory at Princeton University and Joellen Russell, assistant
professor of biogeochemical dynamics at the University of Arizona — two
prominent climate modellers — the computer models that show polar
ice-melt cooling the oceans, stopping the circulation of warm equatorial
water to northern latitudes and triggering another Ice Age (a la the
movie The Day After Tomorrow) are all wrong.

"We missed what was right in front of our eyes," says Prof. Russell.
It’s not ice melt but rather wind circulation that drives ocean currents
northward from the tropics. Climate models until now have not properly
accounted for the wind’s effects on ocean circulation, so researchers
have compensated by over-emphasizing the role of manmade warming on
polar ice melt.

But when Profs. Toggweiler and Russell rejigged their model to include
the 40-year cycle of winds away from the equator (then back towards it
again), the role of ocean currents bringing warm southern waters to the
north was obvious in the current Arctic warming.

Extract from: Forget Global Warming: Welcome To The New Ice Age

Lorne Gunter,  National Post

February 25, 2008

http://www.nationalpost.com/story-printer.html?id=d7c7fcce-d248-4e97-…

Regards

Bonzo

"The question scientists should now be asking is not how much it will
warm over the next 50 to 100 years, but why has it warmed so little
during the major carbon dioxide buildup?" Patrick J. Michaels,
Environmental Scientist , University of Virginia

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comment (1)

Garnaut sets the bar high on climate change , Experts slowly discovering nothing can now stop the sea level from rising by 67 meters , will your children live or die ???

Garnaut sets the bar high on climate change

How long till the experts discover there is nothing that can stop the
sea level from rising by 67 meters

Will your children live

or die waiting for the experts to tell you the truth

NOTHING can stop the sea level rising by 67 meters or about 200 feet

NOTHING can now stop it

40% of all land WILL be under water

400  million refugees WILL soon start arriving in australia

Will your children live or die

Thats the only uncertainty

kanga
=====

Professor Ross Garnaut has delivered an unexpectedly confronting
report on the challenges posed by global warming. It is a message that
the Government would do well to take seriously.

THERE is no doubt that global warming is the world’s greatest crisis,
the real weapon of mass destruction against which a workable defence
strategy must be found, and found soon. It is on every agenda of every
major meeting of world leaders from G8 to APEC to the European
Commission. Indeed, EU President Jose Manuel Barroso last month
described the management of climate change as "the great project of
our generation".

http://www.theage.com.au/news/editorial/garnaut-sets-the-bar-high-on-…

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (3)

Re: I wonder …..

"chemist" <tom-bol…@ntlworld.com> wrote in message

news:69c3e426-d952-4594-a1b9-cb91148c7ef1@b29g2000hsa.googlegroups.com…

>I wonder how much money Roger Coppock gets for his AGW
> support .

Dunno but I’m still waiting for my first pay packet from Exxon!

Regards

Bonzo

"CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet’s climate on
long, medium and even short time scales." R. Timothy Patterson,
Professor Of Geology, Director Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center,
Carleton University, Canada

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (2)