Stupid Climate Reporting

The title of the piece is

“In Bangladesh, climate change is a matter of life and death”

And yet, there is no actual “climate change” documented in the report. They mention “projected” sea level rise, yet there’s not one piece of evidence presented here that there already is sea level rise affecting the region. Maybe there is, but again,  it’s not presented here, which tells me that whatever sea level rise there has been, it’s not measureable. The reporter does talk about cylone, but the link to increased or stronger cyclone and hurricane production has been debunked over and over again. Flooding? Sure, but that is a natural feature of all deltas. That is why most deltas where humans have chosen to reside have some sort of flood controls built around them i.e. dykes and levees. Poverty? That is a man-made condition, not one of “Global Warming… I mean climate change.

Look, I know there is tons of pressure from your editors to do global warming…. er I mean climate change stories this week to ride the wave created by interest in Dopenhagen, but come on, if you’re going to write a piece on the affects of climate change on a region, please at least show effects of or actual damage from climate change.

Climategate – Why We Need To See The Data, Part…. Oh Hell, I’ve Lost Count. UPDATE

The adjustments of temperature data at Darwin Airport, Australia.

I promise my next post will have nothing to do with Climategate….  maybe.

UPDATE:  Here’s another example showing the same data manipulation.

Moutains Out Of Molehills…. Or Himalayans – The IPCC Strikes Out

One of the stated policies of the IPCC is to only use peer reviewed materials in their AR publications. Setting aside questions of peer review accuracy that have been raised due to Climategate, there are instances where they don’t stick to the stated goal. There was one instance where they used a no-peer reviewed graph to show temperature rise. To me, that wasn’t a big deal. But, thanks to the pro-political AGW  RealClimate website, I recently became aware of another instance where the IPCC published a scientific prediction based on non-peer reviewed literature. The issue here is Himalayan glacier melt, and the time frame on which the glaciers are melting. Here is what the IPCC 2007 AR 4 report conveys: Read more »