The way most of the scientific data is brushed under the carpet by our idiots in charge is frigtening. The floor boards are rotten, the carpet is ragged, but it's business as usual for the idiots who are in the government and those trying to get in. 

Global warming as the most important problem facing the planet this century and beyond, is not registering one question nor one answer from the loony tunes characters that mascarade as US presidential candidates. Here is Australia, the LNP is 90 per cent geared to refute the scientific evidence as well as daily observations: 

Say Sydney is now entering its warmest long spell for this time of the year ever and possibly any time of the year with maximum temperature anomaly running hot. Minimum temperature run hot as well, with not a single night with minimum below 20 degrees considering that the average minimum for March is around 17.6 degrees Celsius.

Overall the continent is running hot. record hot. 

But the monkeys who are planning our miserable future — trying to make sure we get less money for more work so they can line their own pockets with cash and those of their mates, the rich blokes (and sheilas) — would not have a clue at what is happening here. They really don't want to know as long as they can sell more coal to China and India. 

They are murdering the future and a bit of the present as well — and they are dishonest.

Eight years down the track since the cover of the National Geographic, the denialists are still winning the high side of the road, because of a bad cultural media (the Mediocre Mass Media de Mierda) led by Uncle Rupe, which is supporting denial of global warming. 

May all the MMMM catch on fire tomorrow in a global warming ill hot wind...

 

A scientific journal editor has criticised the UK’s The Times newspaper for misinterpreting the findings of a special edition that looked at the science linking ocean acidification to impacts on marine organisms.
 
The Times story claimed the publication, led by Dr Howard Browman, had concluded most studies found ocean acidification had little or no impact on marine organisms.
 
But Browman, of the Institute of Marine Research in Norway, said The Times had omitted or misinterpreted key points and “cherry-picked” aspects of an interview with him.

Under the headline Scientists are ‘exaggerating carbon threat to reefs and marine life’, The Times reported on a “special issue” of the ICES Journal of Marine Science looking at ocean acidification, edited by Browman.
 
Ocean acidification (OA) refers to the effect that increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have on the oceans, causing ocean pH to fall, meaning the water is less alkaline.
 
Thousands of OA studies have been published suggesting a wide range of negative impacts on marine organisms, from growth rates of corals to particular fish species and molluscs.
 
A major UN report said there was “high confidence” that ocean acidification “will increase for centuries if CO2 emissions continue, and will strongly affect marine ecosystems.” Effects would be greater when combined with rising ocean temperatures, the IPCC report said.
 
A study in Science in 2015 linked one of the world’s largest extinction events about 250 million years ago to ocean acidification.
 
Written by The Times’ environment editor Ben Webster, the story, republished on The Australian and echoed by the Daily Express, also claimed the impacts of OA on coral reefs had been “exaggerated”.
 
Browman told DeSmog he did not think that studies had “exaggerated” the impacts of OA, and his publication had not found this. But he said some studies could have been more carefully interpreted.
 
Responding to The Times, Browman issued a statement on Twitter:

[The journalist] cherry-picked our conversation and presents phrases out of context - seemingly in order to be sensational - despite the fact that I told him that the press was part of the “exaggeration” problem.

 

The Times story said Browman had “invited scientists around the world to contribute studies on ocean acidification” but “more than half of the 44 studies selected for publication” had found ocean acidification had little or no impact on marine species.
 
But a key reason why so many studies reported “little or no impact” was that Browman had deliberately encouraged researchers to submit articles that had found just these sorts of results.
 
Browman’s introduction in the special issue also outlined this approach, but this key point was missing from The Times' newspaper report.
 
The Times report said there was an “inherent bias” in scientific journals towards “more calamitous predictions” and this had “excluded research” that showed marine organisms were not damaged by ocean acidification.
 
But Browman explained he had actually been referring to a well-known phenomenon that exists across many scientific disciplines known as “publication bias”.

read more: http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/03/10/scientist-accuses-times-newspaper-cherry-picking-ocean-acidification-story

 

biased merde-och press...

Here’s an inconvenient truth for the fossil fuel industry: The majority of Americans accept the scientific consensusthat climate change is real and that it is a threat that must be addressed. This includes a majority of Democrats, a majority of Republicans, and a majority of citizens who do not identify with a specific political party.
 
But here’s a sad truth for Americans who believe in science: The majority of members of the ruling GOP party in Washington, D.C. refuse to accept the science that climate change is happening and that human beings are to blame.
 
According to a new report by the Center for American Progress Action Fund, 59% of the House Republican caucus and 70% of Senate Republicans refuse to accept the reality of climate change. This means there are a total of 182 climate change deniers in the House and Senate who collectively represent more than 200 million American citizens (based on their district/state size that they represent in Congress.)

So how is it possible that the majority of Americans are willing to accept science yet their own representatives ignore it? The answer, as usual, comes down to money.

The CAP report shows that the fossil fuel industry has given more $73 million to these science-denying politicians; $10 million of which came in just the last 12 months, perhaps spurred on by recent reports showing that 2015 once again broke temperature records, or maybe concerned about the falling demand for fossil fuels. But whatever the reason, that $73 million is apparently all it takes to ignore the desires of 200 million concerned American citizens.

http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/03/13/congress-infected-climate-change-deniers-their-constituents-understand-dangers

 

'True shocker': February spike in global temperatures stuns scientists

Date

March 14, 2016 - 11:42AM

• Peter Hannam

Environment Editor, The Sydney Morning Herald

View more articles from Peter Hannam

Follow Peter on Twitter Follow Peter on Google+ Email Peter

March records smashed in Australia

Global temperatures leapt in February, lifting warming from pre-industrial levels to beyond 1.5 degrees, and stoking concerns about a "climate emergency".

According to NASA analysis, average temperatures last month were 1.35 degrees above the norm for the 1951-1980 period.

They smashed the previous biggest departure from the average - set only in the previous month - by 0.21 degrees.

"This is really quite stunning ... it's completely unprecedented," said Stefan Rahmstorf, from Germany's Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research and a visiting professorial fellow at the University of NSW, noting the NASA data as reported by the Wunderground blog.

The monster El Nino event had contributed to the current record run of global temperatures by increasing the area of abnormally warm water in the central and eastern Pacific.

Compared with the rival record giant El Nino of 1997-98, global temperatures are running about 0.5 degrees hotter.

"That shows how much much global warming we have had since then," Professor Rahmstorf said.

The first half of March is at least as warm, he added, and it means temperatures "are clearly more than 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels".

'Emergency'

"We are in a kind of climate emergency now," Professor Rahmstorf said, noting that global carbon dioxide levels last year rose by a record rate of more than 3 parts per million.

"Governments have promised to act [to curb greenhouse gas emissions] and they need to do better than what they promised in Paris" at the global climate summit last December, he said.

Australia has not dodged the heat, either, with record national temperatures falling at the start of March, the Bureau of Meteorology said in a special climate statement.

The heat surge also comes as the future of climate science hangs in the balance in Australia , with the CSIRO planning to slash monitoring and modelling research.

The most northerly latitudes of the planet were the most abnormally hot regions in February, with large areas reporting temperatures 12 degrees or warmer than average, the NASA data shows.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/true-shocker-spike-in-global-temperatures-stuns-scientists-20160313-gni10t.html#ixzz42pzXd6pG 
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook


It is well passed time for the espousers of fossil fuels to come to realise they have fucked up. Global warming is 100 per cent anthropogenic and fossil fuels are the culprits. We should know. Things are not going to get prettier. Despite the price of petrol, oil and gas being at their lowest parity levels ever, we need to wean ourselves away from this teat of doom. Fossil fuels usage by humans is KILLING THE PLANET FAST.
see also: 

GLOBAL WARMING IS BALONEY

 

The first sign of trouble came on Oct. 25, when the Southern California Gas Company filed a terse report with the California Public Utilities Commission noting that a leak had been detected on Oct. 23 at a well in its Aliso Canyon storage facility. Under “Summary,” the report read: “No ignition, no injury. No media.”

The local news media began to take notice, however, when Porter Ranch residents complained of suffocating gas fumes. In response, SoCalGas released a statement on Oct. 28 pointing out that the well was “outdoors at an isolated area of our mountain facility over a mile away from and more than 1,200 feet higher than homes or public areas.” It assured the public that the leak did not present a threat.

Timothy O’Connor, the director of the Environmental Defense Fund’s California Oil and Gas Program, had read about the complaints. But he did not think much of them until Nov. 3, when, at a climate-­policy event in downtown Los Angeles, he learned from an acquaintance who worked at SoCalGas that the company was flying in experts from around the country to help plug the leak. At home that night, O’Connor read everything he could about the Aliso Canyon gas field. How much gas was stored inside the canyon? How much could leak out?

The foothills on which Porter Ranch was built, O’Connor learned, once belonged to J.Paul Getty. His Tide Water Associated Oil Company hit crude in 1938 and did not sell the land until the early 1970s, after it had extracted the last drop. The drained oil field was bought by Pacific Lighting, which used it to store natural gas. With a capacity of 84 billion standard cubic feet, the cavity, which lies between 7,100 and 9,400 feet below the surface, is one of the country’s largest reservoirs of natural gas (which is composed mainly of methane). The facility functions as a kind of gas treasury. When prices are low, the company hoards the gas inside the canyon; when they are high, it releases the gas into pipelines that snake through Los Angeles, heating homes, fueling stoves and providing power to solar-­and ­wind-­energy facilities.

The 115 wells in Aliso Canyon can be imagined as long straws dipping into a vast subterranean sea of methane. The leaking well, SS-25, is a steel tube seven inches in diameter that descends 8,748 feet from the canyon’s ridge. The well is plainly visible from many of the streets in Porter Ranch. From the ground, it resembles a derrick, set beside a series of low white buildings. If you look at it through a pair of binoculars, you can make out, flying from its highest girder, an American flag.

read more:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/03/magazine/the-invisible-catastrophe.html?_r=0